3 ms·

I think your analogy isn’t right. None of those standards are mandatory. Would M.2 have come out when it did if you needed to change the law to permit it to be

I think your analogy isn’t right. None of those standards are mandatory. Would M.2 have come out when it did if you needed to change the law to permit it to be used over SATA? USB-C is already a standard just like all your other examples. This law forbids using other standards. > New innovations can be brought forth in the same way they are with the other standards mentioned above: developed in a harmonised manner I think you are confused about how consumer product innovation happens in the real world. You don’t form a committee and convince them that your new product is better. You bring something new to market and if it succeeds, you make money and gain market share; like Apple did when they brought out Lightning. Even if you are building a new standard like M.2, you are still competing with other standards, all of which can be chosen by your customers as they deem appropriate. By definition it is now harder to innovate on charging cables simply because you can’t try something new. It is perfectly fine to say “I don’t think we need to prioritize innovation in this sector any more; eWaste is more important than innovation”. I wouldn’t even argue with that claim in the short term. But it’s not credible to deny that this will have a negative effect on innovation. That is always the impact of regulation like this. If nothing else, startups are now forbidden from experimenting with this variable.

kstenerud 4y ago
> None of those standards are mandatory AC power cord standards ARE mandatory. The other standards don't require enforcement because the industry has already converged on the standards and didn't need a push. This will be the equivalent power cord standard for DC devices. However, unlike AC power cords, USB-C also transmits data, and will thus require further innovations (much like the innovations in twisted pair networking). Will there be less innovation? In a small way, yes, because nobody can unilaterally push some new power cable standard by leveraging their market dominance. But then again, market dominance usually results in protectionism instead of openness (lightning cable, memory stick, Beta, etc), so such innovation would have been a dead-end e-waste producer anyway. What big players CAN do now is influence the newer standards to adopt their (free and open) innovations, like they do with all other standards out there. The great thing about open standards is that the rising tide lifts all boats.
geraneum 4y ago
This is an unrealistic view of how current standards are introduced, approved and adopted. Interesting that you mentioned Apple, when they are using their significant market share to push lightning down their customers throats. The standards mentioned, are approved mostly by consortiums of big enterprises. So in a sense, there’s already a committee that evaluates and passes them. You also find the usual suspects among them i.e. Apple, IBM, HP, Google, etc. there’s no small startup there.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
pydry 4y ago
>But it’s not credible to deny that this will have a negative effect on innovation. Why? What consumer friendly innovations in charging have we had since USB C came out that this law would have made illegal if it were introduced from the start? >That is always the impact of regulation like this. I think it would be fair to say that if we could point to examples of useful innovation in the past that would have been killed by this legislation. But can we?
simion314 4y ago
> By definition it is now harder to innovate on charging cables simply because you can’t try something new. Sure you can, because you have to support the standard but Apple could invent HyperSuperCoolRoundedCornerCharger and put it as an alternative, if it charges hyper super faster then the standard the customers will prefer it and buy the super expensive platinum Apple Genuine DRM protected charger and Apple makes money, customers are happy and if Apple wants to drop the standard USB they can just standardize their cool shit and it will become the new standard.
- theptip 4y ago
  To be clear, if USB-C charging is mandatory, you cannot have an alternative charging port, unless you want to have multiple ports on your device, which is (I think obviously) absurd. By requiring USB-C, you forbid other port types from being used. So this regulation is forbidding Apple from using their Lightning connector, and also forbidding any other vendor from introducing an alternative. Without revision it presumably also forbids anyone from using USB-D if/when that comes out. Ironically the mode of experimentation from Apple that you're describing as desirable is the current state of the world, and is the thing that is being forbidden here; this regulation is explicitly targeted at getting Apple to stop using their alternative "HyperSuperCoolRoundedCornerCharger" as you put it, and to change their product to use USB-C.
  - simion314 4y ago
    - theptip 4y ago

kstenerud 4y ago

> None of those standards are mandatory AC power cord standards ARE mandatory. The other standards don't require enforcement because the industry has already converged on the standards and didn't need a push. This will be the equivalent power cord standard for DC devices. However, unlike AC power cords, USB-C also transmits data, and will thus require further innovations (much like the innovations in twisted pair networking). Will there be less innovation? In a small way, yes, because nobody can unilaterally push some new power cable standard by leveraging their market dominance. But then again, market dominance usually results in protectionism instead of openness (lightning cable, memory stick, Beta, etc), so such innovation would have been a dead-end e-waste producer anyway. What big players CAN do now is influence the newer standards to adopt their (free and open) innovations, like they do with all other standards out there. The great thing about open standards is that the rising tide lifts all boats.

geraneum 4y ago

This is an unrealistic view of how current standards are introduced, approved and adopted. Interesting that you mentioned Apple, when they are using their significant market share to push lightning down their customers throats. The standards mentioned, are approved mostly by consortiums of big enterprises. So in a sense, there’s already a committee that evaluates and passes them. You also find the usual suspects among them i.e. Apple, IBM, HP, Google, etc. there’s no small startup there.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

pydry 4y ago

>But it’s not credible to deny that this will have a negative effect on innovation. Why? What consumer friendly innovations in charging have we had since USB C came out that this law would have made illegal if it were introduced from the start? >That is always the impact of regulation like this. I think it would be fair to say that if we could point to examples of useful innovation in the past that would have been killed by this legislation. But can we?

simion314 4y ago

> By definition it is now harder to innovate on charging cables simply because you can’t try something new. Sure you can, because you have to support the standard but Apple could invent HyperSuperCoolRoundedCornerCharger and put it as an alternative, if it charges hyper super faster then the standard the customers will prefer it and buy the super expensive platinum Apple Genuine DRM protected charger and Apple makes money, customers are happy and if Apple wants to drop the standard USB they can just standardize their cool shit and it will become the new standard.

theptip 4y ago
To be clear, if USB-C charging is mandatory, you cannot have an alternative charging port, unless you want to have multiple ports on your device, which is (I think obviously) absurd. By requiring USB-C, you forbid other port types from being used. So this regulation is forbidding Apple from using their Lightning connector, and also forbidding any other vendor from introducing an alternative. Without revision it presumably also forbids anyone from using USB-D if/when that comes out. Ironically the mode of experimentation from Apple that you're describing as desirable is the current state of the world, and is the thing that is being forbidden here; this regulation is explicitly targeted at getting Apple to stop using their alternative "HyperSuperCoolRoundedCornerCharger" as you put it, and to change their product to use USB-C.
- simion314 4y ago
  - theptip 4y ago