16 ms·

A lot of people saying "USB-C cables aren't even compatible with each other!" (Nintendo switch etc.) Guess what: that's exactly the problem this regulation is i

by bloppe 4y ago

A lot of people saying "USB-C cables aren't even compatible with each other!" (Nintendo switch etc.) Guess what: that's exactly the problem this regulation is intended to solve. Fake USB-C cables like Nintendo's that have the right shape but do not adhere to spec should gradually disappear along with lightning cables. The regulation actually says that cables can no longer be bundled with the devices themselves, so Nintendo would stop sending you that fake cable with your switch, and you would just buy a real one to work with all your devices. Other people saying "what about innovation!?" That's fine. Let's say the USB consortium releases USB-D with input from Apple, Google, and many other stakeholders. The EU can set another deadline for newly released devices to adhere to the new version instead of the old one. The transition will involve a period of time where older devices are still on C and newer ones on D, which is totally compatible with the regulation and is necessary with or without regulation. It's ludicrous to think companies won't be able to "iterate": you would be crazy to go to market with any cable technology that isn't already very mature. Apple spent years designing lighting chargers because they knew that once they were released they'd be around for a long time (and they have been!)

leadingthenet 4y ago
> Let's say the USB consortium releases USB-D with input from Apple, Google, and many other stakeholders [...] If you have to make such an argument, you've already lost. Innovation, particularly disruptive and / or breakthrough innovation, does not happen by committee, no matter how many times over history people tried deluding themselves into thinking that it does. So no, it's not fine.
- tankenmate 4y ago
  The directive is designed to make things easier for customers and the environment, not OEMs per se (even though there will be benefits for a number of companies).
- Bayart 4y ago
  Standards happen by committee. They're not disruptive and that's the point.
  - afpx 4y ago
    Standards bodies work like other technical teams. They actually produce useful output if they're fed sufficient requirements and stakeholder input.
- earthboundkid 4y ago
  > Innovation, particularly disruptive and / or breakthrough innovation, does not happen by committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD#History Never make an absolutist statement. They're always wrong. :-)
  - ithkuil 4y ago
    > They're always wrong Lol. An interesting version of the liars paradox.
- 10x-dev 4y ago
  I'm ok if my life doesn't get disrupted every 2 years with a new type of incompatible connection between my devices. Maybe we could put all that innovation and consumer inconvenience into resolving climate change.
  - nickpp 4y ago
    Maybe we could’ve put all that regulatory effort and politician time into resolving not even climate change, but just EU's dependence on cheap Russian fossil fuels.
- notJim 4y ago
  It's very strange to read this comment on article about USB, which has been developed by committee from the beginning. To me it seems quite innovative, and arguably disruptive to have a single standard for all these things. Maybe USB doesn't clear your personal bar, but then why worry about this at all?
  - dfox 4y ago
    From time to time Intel's marketing tries to sell the idea that USB was invented by this one Intel engineer. Somewhat obviously that is not true. On the other hand if you compare USB 1.0 to 1.1 it is quite obvious that real implementation experience and throwing out artifacts of the design by committee was quite important for the success.
    - warning26 4y ago
      > On the other hand if you compare USB 1.0 to 1.1 it is quite obvious that real implementation experience and throwing out artifacts of the design by committee was quite important for the success. This sounds like it has some interesting history there; do you have any recommended sources to read about the transition between USB 1.0 and 1.1?
    - ghaff 4y ago
      I was going to disagree as I used to know one the standards people at Intel quite well (who always regretted that USB was orientation specific)--and I didn't remember anything like that. But you're right. Intel was pushing Ajay Bhatt was one of the people Intel highlighted as a face behind Intel's technology. (Although the campaign wasn't specific to USB.) https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2009/05/intel_ad_campaign_remakes_rese.html https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2009/05/intel_ad_campaig...
    - bsder 4y ago
      > Somewhat obviously that is not true. Especially since I know that several people at Digital Equipment Corporation had to do the signal integrity analysis for Intel for the original USB standard.
  - 4y ago
- akira2501 4y ago
  > Innovation, particularly disruptive and / or breakthrough innovation We are talking about power cables here. Are you anticipating something major in this space? Is it reasonable to do so?
  - leadingthenet 4y ago
    Disruptive technology cannot be anticipated. It's tautological.
    - Panoramix 4y ago
      It can be disproved within reason. The only new thing a magic new cable would bring to the table is more power, which is not practical to have. The big innovation I'd love to have? Having only ONE charger for all my devices, forever. That absolutely destroys any "innovation" Apple or whoever can bring to the table.
- antisthenes 4y ago
  Proprietary connectors are about as far from innovation as you can possibly get, unless you count patent moats and corporate grift as part of innovating.
- bushbaba 4y ago
  Well, innovation does shift to circumventing the regulation. Such-as removal of the charging port all together, and moving to magsafe-qi charging https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MHXH3AM/A/magsafe-charger https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MHXH3AM/A/magsafe-charger
  - layer8 4y ago
    …which wastes energy and reduces battery life. Great innovation.
    - paulmd 4y ago
      it's always interesting to me that people ignore the ecological impact of cables. If you break four cables over the life of the phone from plugging/unplugging, and that results in 2 or 3 additional Amazon Prime trips to deliver your cables, how does that compare in terms of environmental impact to wasting 5 additional watts for the 1 hour a day you charge your phone? (and don't tell me everybody uses Amazon Prime day shipping... people just order new cables when they break. And sure, you can have one common pool of all your cables... sort of! except for the part where cable X or charger X doesn't fast-charge device Y, so you actually need several pools of chargers and cables...)
      - layer8 4y ago
        I personally never had a charging cable break in ~12 years, owning multiple mobile devices in parallel, so in my experience that isn’t a relevant consideration. That aside, I’m more concerned with the accelerated decrease in battery life that I experienced first-hand with MagSafe charging. I stopped using it because of that.
        paulmd 4y ago
        I guess I did say plugging/unplugging, but certain types of cables are very prone to kinking. I've broken a number of cables if they get a loop and then you set something heavy on them, or if you lay on them in bed, etc. In the car I go through a 3.5mm cable and a usb cable every couple years as well, for largely the same reasons - they get tugged or bumped or something set on them and they break. It's especially likely with the crappy cheap cables that most people buy - I've had a lot better luck since switching to mostly braided cables, I think the sheath gives it a bit more strength. Failures due to "user error" are still failures that induce cable replacement, and a cable that you interact with less (because it's running to a fixed wireless charger stand/pad) is less likely to have user error failure modes like that. Wireless connection or wireless charging (built into the car, f.ex) removes these modes entirely - you can't break an aux cable that doesn't exist. You can't just assume "nobody ever breaks a cable" as being a realistic proposition when looking at the lifecycle of these products - I'm not sure I believe you in the first place that you've never broken a cable in 12 years but that's certainly not realistic for the population as a whole.
- bloppe 4y ago
  > Innovation ... does not happen by committee. If you have to make such an argument... Good luck with that. This one in particular has many existing counterexamples, including USB-C itself.
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Ah what lovely place our technological lives would be without standards, that are done by committees... No standardised wireless technologies like Bluetooth, WiFi, 1G, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G... Each and every provider and technology manufacturer running their own incompatible networks... Hey, maybe throw away IP and TCP too... Let each site run on their own proprietary protocol...
  - nwienert 4y ago
    Those protocols were developed without government mandate.
    - TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
      And so will USB-D
    - dfox 4y ago
      ETSI (which is the parent organization of 3GPP) is technically an independent non-profit NGO, but in reality it is part of EU bureaucracy and was chartered by EC.
- joadha 4y ago
  Would you mind clarifying your argument? How would you define "breakthrough innovation"? I think that's critical to my understanding of your point.
  - peheje 4y ago
    Not OP. But a breakthrough innovation in charging could be a new battery-technology holding charge for much longer but required different charging specifications offered by USB-C. Such a breakthrough would hopefully get enough attention from EU to get the law updated. Or they might want the devices to still have USB-C? Who knows who's in charge then. Also missing from this discussion is the fact that even if the law is only about charging it will define he go-to data-connection for smaller devices for a long time, where an additional port will be dimensionally challenging, more costly to add as well as difficult to make water-resistant. I am sympathetic for reducing e-waste, but I'm unsure where this will lead us. Crypto-mining is also bad for the environment but might hold unknown positive possibilities if explored properly (maybe reduce bureaucracy, avoid monopolies) that could be extinguished by a premature ban. I am already paying some of the highest taxes on consumer products compared to other countries in the world, I would rather pay even more for a charger, phone etc., remember an adapter when out and about and keep the freedom of choosing which technologies to support. *Also just wanted to add that even if OP mentioned the committee, I'm unsure how much you can compare that to EU making laws enforceable in 27 countries.
- Barrin92 4y ago
  who needs breakthrough innovation for a charger? It's like the C++ programming language, I just want it to work everywhere. Programming languages have been designed by committee just fine.
  - usr1106 4y ago
    That's a weird argument. What would you say if EU demanded us to stop programming in Python, Rust, bash and mandate that only C++ must used? No, I have no problem with the USB-C mandate. But the analogy seems weird.
    - Barrin92 4y ago
      >What would you say if EU demanded us to stop programming in Python, Rust, bash and mandate that only C++ must used? I support the idea that regulatory bodies like the EU create stronger software standards in safety critical applications in particular so that software 'engineering' actually starts to deserve that label so I have no problem with a good faith version of that take.
  - midasuni 4y ago
    Ok. Go back 5 years and standardise on the ubiquitous usb-mini — usb-a solution. Why does my next phone need a charger? I’d be happy with wireless charging — especially if I have a 3.5mm socket in the phone too.
    - kaibee 4y ago
      It would have been bad to standardize on USB-B and it will be good to standardize on USB-C. These aren't mutually exclusive statements.
    - tremon 4y ago
      What do you mean with "go back 5 years"? You're aware that things were already standardized on USB Micro-B in 2009? This is just an update to the existing situation, with one slight but important difference: while under the previous MoU Apple was still allowed to buck the trend, this new legislation will force Apple to fall in line. For the rest of the industry, nothing will change. In 2009, the Commission facilitated a voluntary memorandum of understanding (MoU), signed by major producers, that aimed to guarantee interoperability between chargers and mobile phones on the EU market. The MoU resulted in a significant reduction of available charger types and a convergence to USB Micro-B connectors on the device side: while there were more than 30 proprietary chargers on the EU market in 2009, by 2012 (a year after the MoU started to apply), nine in ten new devices supported the USB Micro-B connection. (from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698819/EPRS_BRI(2021)698819_EN.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/6988...)
- Daishiman 4y ago
  > Innovation, particularly disruptive and / or breakthrough innovation, does not happen by committee, no matter how many times over history people tried deluding themselves into thinking that it does. You have no evidence to back this up. There's been throughout history many innovative standards that have gone through committee work, including a ton of network protocols.
- whiskey14 4y ago
  I guess a lot of the other replies here are saying the same thing. Innovation is first. Standardisation is second. That way, more people can make use of and innovate further on the original idea.
- brodock 4y ago
  They happen between walled gardens, them they sponsor a comitee to turn into a standard. The only difference between current and standard based is a bunch of extra burocracy where your competitor will try to fit their custom walled garden extension that is hard to implement to give them an edge.
- mitchdoogle 4y ago
  One of the companies can continue to do research into new cable technologies, and when they've found something that is amazing they can present it to the committee for approval as the new standard. The committee is not there to innovate, it is there to ensure that everyone is using the same thing, which is a benefit to (most) consumers.
cm2187 4y ago
In fact interoperability is what enables innovation, vs walled gardens.
- bsnal 4y ago
  Seems like history of computing goes against this
  - Ekaros 4y ago
    PC and x86 took us pretty far... And that was mostly carried on interoperability... I doubt we would have gotten to technology being as ubiquitous as it is without it.
    - GuB-42 4y ago
      Also, the internet itself.
      - nickpp 4y ago
        Funny enough, France's failed internet, the Minitel would probably be the solution pushed today by the EU. The Internet won on the free market, through its own merits. No politician intervention necessary. Even if plenty tried to capture the glory (information superhighway…)
        tremon 4y ago
        Do you have any credible sources to base that claim on, other than "let's paint the government as idiots"? Did you know that TCP/IP was based on that other "failed" french network, Cyclades? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CYCLADES https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CYCLADES
    - ranguna 4y ago
      I'm all in favour the EU doing what it's doing, but x86 is actually a good example to not enforce this standard. Imagine that the EU enforced x86 as well, what would've happened to ARM ?
tediousdemise 4y ago
It's kind of sad to me that Apple doesn't make Lightning an open standard. In all my years, I haven't had a single Lightning connector fail on me. The solid metal where the contacts reside is just too robust to wear out or get damaged (unless you somehow step on it the right way or let it corrode). USB-C connectors, on the other hand, seems to loosen after a rather small number mates and de-mates, leading people to use preemptive workarounds such as magnetic connectors.
- baq 4y ago
  The cables though… they used to be a joke. I’ve wrapped mine with electrical tape near ends so they last longer.
  - tediousdemise 4y ago
    Definitely, those Apple-supplied cables suck hard. Adding little tension relief springs[0] to the ends can protect them if you don't want to buy another (or more robust) cable and create more e-waste. You can find the springs in clicky pens. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCIo8xGTUX0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCIo8xGTUX0
    - WanderPanda 4y ago
      The Apple supplied cables seem to be quite environmentally friendly already since they literally rot at the ends. Not only lightning but also the MagSafe ones. The Lightning connector itself mechanically is the best connector I've ever encountered, though. Pure satisfaction when plugging it in, even after 5 years or so
  - Larrikin 4y ago
    I think at some point they changed the material. I had never had a single cord fray on me except every single Apple supplied white cord for years, until suddenly I no longer had that problem. Don't know what changed but glad it did
    - 4y ago
ZekeSulastin 4y ago
“The regulation actually says that cables can no longer be bundled with the devices themselves” I don’t think anyone’s mentioned that. Oh my god, tech social media is going to melt down when that kicks in if the reaction to chargers being excluded is any indication (not to mention a repeat of the shift from 30-pin to Lightning in Apple’s case, except now without a cable).
- enkid 4y ago
  If it comes with being able to buy a $5 cable to act as a charge, I don't see how people could complain. (But I know they will.)
  - phkahler 4y ago
    >> If it comes with being able to buy a $5 cable to act as a charge, I don't see how people could complain. Even better, just use the old cable from your old device since they won't be designing a new one every other year.
    - kennywinker 4y ago
      As far as a I know, in the history of smartphones - which I'd say starts in 2007 with the launch of the iPhone - there have only really been 4 (or maybe 5) connectors used on widely sold phones: 1. Apple 30pin "iPod" connector 2. Apple Lightning connector 3. Mini USB (I don't think this ever appeared on anything but blackberries and cheapo flip phones?) 4. Micro USB 5. USB-C So, while I agree that cable changes are annoying, and I support standardization efforts, "a new one every other year" is just not how it's ever been. 5 connectors in 15 years. The 30pin connector reigned from 2007 to 2012, and on the android side, micro USB was dominant until around 2015-2016 when USB-C started showing up on phones. Realistically, it's been a new connector every ~7 years.
      - sydd 4y ago
        Except that the current USB-C situation is a mess, and this regulation plans to solve this. I got a pretty expensive HP monitor for work from my company that connects via USB-C (and can charge my Mac). IT has sworn me to not loose its USB-C cable because for some unknown reasons it refuses to work with other cables, it costs >$100 and is constantly out of stock.
robonerd 4y ago
I don't see why "What about innovation?" is taken seriously as an argument anyway. USB-C is more than adequate, we could coast with it for the next hundred years. Nobody is kept up at night by the lack of innovation in AC power plugs, the standards countries have settled on today, while not all equivalent, are all generally satisfactory in practice. Problem solved; stop fixing that which ain't broke and move on to other matters. Yeah yeah, "640k should be enough for everybody". There comes a point where that is actually true.
- solarkraft 4y ago
  > Nobody is kept up at night by the lack of innovation in AC power plugs Mandatory Tom Scott video about bri'ish power plugs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEfP1OKKz_Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEfP1OKKz_Q :-)
  - tleilaxu 4y ago
    British plugs are the only thing I will ever get nationalistic about. They’re great. Hurt like a sod to stand on if the prongs are face up though!
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - kyriakos 4y ago
      Being in an ex British colony it's one of the good things left to us from that time but unfortunately it means we need adaptors wherever we travel.
  - avar 4y ago
    That's a good overview of the features of UK plugs, but a terrible one for establishing the supposed superiority of the UK design. Much of what he describes is e.g. a feature of Schuko plugs/sockets. The main distinguishing feature of the UK design is a technical workaround for a problem that no longer exists (WWII copper shortage requiring the embedded fuse).
nonethewiser 4y ago
> The regulation actually says that cables can no longer be bundled with the devices themselves, Wait, what? That's idiotic
- thomasahle 4y ago
  Idiotic? It's a pretty smart and simple way to incentivice manufacturers to ship devices that work with standard USB-C cables. It may be annoying if you don't already own a bunch of USB-C cables. But who doesn't?
  - cypress66 4y ago
    But now you have people complaining that their device doesn't work, charges slowly, transfers slowly because they are using a crappy cable they got from Amazon. Especially for devices that require quite high end cables.
alerighi 4y ago
I think this is a stupid thing. Repurposing a commonly used connector for other things to reuse cheap connectors and cables is something that is usually done in the electronic industry (e.g. my oscilloscope use an HDMI socket for the logic analyzer input, you have plenty of lines and the connector is cheap and good). It's not uncommon to design a board and use type-C only for power (5V input, without the circuitry to handle power delivery, so you must connect a suitable power supply) or for other things (TTL serial data). > Fake USB-C cables like Nintendo's that have the right shape but do not adhere to spec should gradually disappear along with lightning cables Which spec? There are a multitude of them! What we do, adhere all to the best spec and to only feed 5V power to a device (that could be done with 2 wires) require the same cable used to connect a thunderbolt device at 40Gb/s? Of course not, since the first one costs a couple of dollars, the second one tens of dollars, the first one can be as long as voltage drop permits it to be, the second one needs to be maximum 1 meter, the first one needs no shielding at all, the second one needs to be heavily shielded, that not only increases cost but makes it bulkier. And again, does a data cable that is used for thunderbolt connection (assuming that the thunderbolt device is externally powered) be designed to carry the full 5A of the spec? 5A is a lot of current, it will require bigger conductors, but for a data cable it doesn't make sense! Type-C is a standard that makes to me not a lot of sense: they wanted to create the one connector that fits all, while in the past they designed different connector, one for each device, not because they wanted you to buy more cables but to avoid confusion in customers, if the cable fits it works I used to say back in the day, the VGA connector was physically different from a serial port, the PS2 connector was not the same as a parallel port, even if they could have done everything with one port they didn't.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- groby_b 4y ago
  > Of course not, since the first one costs a couple of dollars, the second one tens of dollars, Of course yes. If the industry was stupid enough to put all of this behind a single plug, then single cable it is. Because pretty much every consumer who has more than one USB3/C cable is dead tired of "oh. This combo doesn't work, let me root for the other cables" Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
maccard 4y ago
I was one of the Nintendo switch commenters in this thread - the problem I have is standardising on the connector without enforcing the underlying standards. This doesn't fix the charging problem or the cable problem, it just means that the all devices fit together, even if they don't actually deliver what they're supposed to.
shaded-enmity 4y ago
No it's not fine, this is just another coercion and consolidation of power where it shouldn't belong. Independent entities cannot innovate on their own because now there's a central apparatus that decides what should be innovated and how, with all the inherent political power struggles of big players, good luck. EU should be there to set goals, not to dictate implementation.
burlesona 4y ago
Just imagine if this had been done in the 90s, we’d be stuck on VGA cables for all video and wouldn’t have hi-def TV. Strict regulation causes ossification.
- bloppe 4y ago
  The regulation does not require devices to only support USB-C, just that they at least support USB-C for charging. They can always have multiple ports. If the 40Gbps offered by USB-C is really not enough for you, then your device is probably big enough that multiple ports does not mess up your device's form factor. Also, the regulation does not require devices to support USB-C forever, just that all devices support the same open charging standard. That standard can and will evolve over time; maybe not as fast as it would if not regulated, but it's pretty contrived to think it would actually stifle innovation.
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  The EU did it before, forcing phone manufacturers to move to micro-usb https://www.wired.com/2009/06/europe-gets-universal-cellphone-charger-in-2010/ https://www.wired.com/2009/06/europe-gets-universal-cellphon... From memory, Apple argued for an exception and got it approved for its products. So, having this kind of directive doesn't block special products, nor has any specific impact on the field evolving healthily. If anything, without this kind of regulation we'd probably still have 95 different charging cable standards.
  - zaarn 4y ago
    Apple didn't quite got an approved exception, the previous agreement on micro-USB was essentially a non-binding agreement between the industry and the EU. With the heavy implication that if it's not adhered to, then the EU will make it a regulation or directive. Apple adhered by letter by making chargers USB and the phone not have USB, contrary to what the agreement wanted to achieve in spirit. The EU approving this directive is simply the logical end conclusion of apple (and some small fish) not playing ball when asked to.
dwaite 4y ago
The problem isn't generally fake cables, it is: 1. Cables have radically different capabilities - they may charge at 60W, 100W or 240W ; they may be limited to 480 mbps transmission rates or go all the way up to 40 gbps transmission. Up until now, the market has not regulated such that you can tell the difference when you grab a random cable, or necessarily tell the difference at time of purchase 2. Devices like the Nintendo Switch and Raspberry Pi shipped with broken implementations. For instance, the RPi would not work with cables that _supported_ over 60W charging rates.
AlchemistCamp 4y ago
> Other people saying "what about innovation!?" That's fine. Let's say the USB consortium releases USB-D with input from Apple, Google, and many other stakeholders. The EU can set another deadline for newly released devices to adhere to the new version instead of the old one. The transition will involve a period of time where older devices are still on C and newer ones on D, which is totally compatible with the regulation and is necessary with or without regulation. If your idea of "innovation" is moving from one version of a spec to another version of the same spec requiring multiple trillion dollar companies and the EU setting a timeline, then your usage of the word is much narrower than mine. Many advances that I consider truly innovative have often come from outsiders without the backing of the largest companies in the world and succeeded from the bottom up.
ecnahc515 4y ago
> and you would just buy a real one to work with all your devices. Except that could kill your Nintendo switch, and it's not like Nintendo is going to change how their hardware works on something that's already been released to the masses.
- strbean 4y ago
  > Except that could kill your Nintendo switch That's strictly an issue of atrocious hardware design in the switch and nothing else. >[...] it's not like Nintendo is going to change how their hardware works on something that's already been released to the masses. They will if they want to continue selling them in the EU after the deadline.

by bloppe 4y ago

leadingthenet 4y ago

> Let's say the USB consortium releases USB-D with input from Apple, Google, and many other stakeholders [...] If you have to make such an argument, you've already lost. Innovation, particularly disruptive and / or breakthrough innovation, does not happen by committee, no matter how many times over history people tried deluding themselves into thinking that it does. So no, it's not fine.

tankenmate 4y ago
The directive is designed to make things easier for customers and the environment, not OEMs per se (even though there will be benefits for a number of companies).
Bayart 4y ago
Standards happen by committee. They're not disruptive and that's the point.
- afpx 4y ago
  Standards bodies work like other technical teams. They actually produce useful output if they're fed sufficient requirements and stakeholder input.
earthboundkid 4y ago
> Innovation, particularly disruptive and / or breakthrough innovation, does not happen by committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD#History Never make an absolutist statement. They're always wrong. :-)
- ithkuil 4y ago
  > They're always wrong Lol. An interesting version of the liars paradox.
10x-dev 4y ago
I'm ok if my life doesn't get disrupted every 2 years with a new type of incompatible connection between my devices. Maybe we could put all that innovation and consumer inconvenience into resolving climate change.
- nickpp 4y ago
  Maybe we could’ve put all that regulatory effort and politician time into resolving not even climate change, but just EU's dependence on cheap Russian fossil fuels.
notJim 4y ago
It's very strange to read this comment on article about USB, which has been developed by committee from the beginning. To me it seems quite innovative, and arguably disruptive to have a single standard for all these things. Maybe USB doesn't clear your personal bar, but then why worry about this at all?
- dfox 4y ago
  From time to time Intel's marketing tries to sell the idea that USB was invented by this one Intel engineer. Somewhat obviously that is not true. On the other hand if you compare USB 1.0 to 1.1 it is quite obvious that real implementation experience and throwing out artifacts of the design by committee was quite important for the success.
  - warning26 4y ago
    > On the other hand if you compare USB 1.0 to 1.1 it is quite obvious that real implementation experience and throwing out artifacts of the design by committee was quite important for the success. This sounds like it has some interesting history there; do you have any recommended sources to read about the transition between USB 1.0 and 1.1?
  - ghaff 4y ago
    I was going to disagree as I used to know one the standards people at Intel quite well (who always regretted that USB was orientation specific)--and I didn't remember anything like that. But you're right. Intel was pushing Ajay Bhatt was one of the people Intel highlighted as a face behind Intel's technology. (Although the campaign wasn't specific to USB.) https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2009/05/intel_ad_campaign_remakes_rese.html https://www.oregonlive.com/business/2009/05/intel_ad_campaig...
  - bsder 4y ago
    > Somewhat obviously that is not true. Especially since I know that several people at Digital Equipment Corporation had to do the signal integrity analysis for Intel for the original USB standard.
- 4y ago
akira2501 4y ago
> Innovation, particularly disruptive and / or breakthrough innovation We are talking about power cables here. Are you anticipating something major in this space? Is it reasonable to do so?
- leadingthenet 4y ago
  Disruptive technology cannot be anticipated. It's tautological.
  - Panoramix 4y ago
    It can be disproved within reason. The only new thing a magic new cable would bring to the table is more power, which is not practical to have. The big innovation I'd love to have? Having only ONE charger for all my devices, forever. That absolutely destroys any "innovation" Apple or whoever can bring to the table.
antisthenes 4y ago
Proprietary connectors are about as far from innovation as you can possibly get, unless you count patent moats and corporate grift as part of innovating.
bushbaba 4y ago
Well, innovation does shift to circumventing the regulation. Such-as removal of the charging port all together, and moving to magsafe-qi charging https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MHXH3AM/A/magsafe-charger https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MHXH3AM/A/magsafe-charger
- layer8 4y ago
  …which wastes energy and reduces battery life. Great innovation.
  - paulmd 4y ago
    it's always interesting to me that people ignore the ecological impact of cables. If you break four cables over the life of the phone from plugging/unplugging, and that results in 2 or 3 additional Amazon Prime trips to deliver your cables, how does that compare in terms of environmental impact to wasting 5 additional watts for the 1 hour a day you charge your phone? (and don't tell me everybody uses Amazon Prime day shipping... people just order new cables when they break. And sure, you can have one common pool of all your cables... sort of! except for the part where cable X or charger X doesn't fast-charge device Y, so you actually need several pools of chargers and cables...)
    - layer8 4y ago
      I personally never had a charging cable break in ~12 years, owning multiple mobile devices in parallel, so in my experience that isn’t a relevant consideration. That aside, I’m more concerned with the accelerated decrease in battery life that I experienced first-hand with MagSafe charging. I stopped using it because of that.
      - paulmd 4y ago
        I guess I did say plugging/unplugging, but certain types of cables are very prone to kinking. I've broken a number of cables if they get a loop and then you set something heavy on them, or if you lay on them in bed, etc. In the car I go through a 3.5mm cable and a usb cable every couple years as well, for largely the same reasons - they get tugged or bumped or something set on them and they break. It's especially likely with the crappy cheap cables that most people buy - I've had a lot better luck since switching to mostly braided cables, I think the sheath gives it a bit more strength. Failures due to "user error" are still failures that induce cable replacement, and a cable that you interact with less (because it's running to a fixed wireless charger stand/pad) is less likely to have user error failure modes like that. Wireless connection or wireless charging (built into the car, f.ex) removes these modes entirely - you can't break an aux cable that doesn't exist. You can't just assume "nobody ever breaks a cable" as being a realistic proposition when looking at the lifecycle of these products - I'm not sure I believe you in the first place that you've never broken a cable in 12 years but that's certainly not realistic for the population as a whole.
bloppe 4y ago
> Innovation ... does not happen by committee. If you have to make such an argument... Good luck with that. This one in particular has many existing counterexamples, including USB-C itself.
Ekaros 4y ago
Ah what lovely place our technological lives would be without standards, that are done by committees... No standardised wireless technologies like Bluetooth, WiFi, 1G, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G... Each and every provider and technology manufacturer running their own incompatible networks... Hey, maybe throw away IP and TCP too... Let each site run on their own proprietary protocol...
- nwienert 4y ago
  Those protocols were developed without government mandate.
  - TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
    And so will USB-D
  - dfox 4y ago
    ETSI (which is the parent organization of 3GPP) is technically an independent non-profit NGO, but in reality it is part of EU bureaucracy and was chartered by EC.
joadha 4y ago
Would you mind clarifying your argument? How would you define "breakthrough innovation"? I think that's critical to my understanding of your point.
- peheje 4y ago
  Not OP. But a breakthrough innovation in charging could be a new battery-technology holding charge for much longer but required different charging specifications offered by USB-C. Such a breakthrough would hopefully get enough attention from EU to get the law updated. Or they might want the devices to still have USB-C? Who knows who's in charge then. Also missing from this discussion is the fact that even if the law is only about charging it will define he go-to data-connection for smaller devices for a long time, where an additional port will be dimensionally challenging, more costly to add as well as difficult to make water-resistant. I am sympathetic for reducing e-waste, but I'm unsure where this will lead us. Crypto-mining is also bad for the environment but might hold unknown positive possibilities if explored properly (maybe reduce bureaucracy, avoid monopolies) that could be extinguished by a premature ban. I am already paying some of the highest taxes on consumer products compared to other countries in the world, I would rather pay even more for a charger, phone etc., remember an adapter when out and about and keep the freedom of choosing which technologies to support. *Also just wanted to add that even if OP mentioned the committee, I'm unsure how much you can compare that to EU making laws enforceable in 27 countries.
Barrin92 4y ago
who needs breakthrough innovation for a charger? It's like the C++ programming language, I just want it to work everywhere. Programming languages have been designed by committee just fine.
- usr1106 4y ago
  That's a weird argument. What would you say if EU demanded us to stop programming in Python, Rust, bash and mandate that only C++ must used? No, I have no problem with the USB-C mandate. But the analogy seems weird.
  - Barrin92 4y ago
    >What would you say if EU demanded us to stop programming in Python, Rust, bash and mandate that only C++ must used? I support the idea that regulatory bodies like the EU create stronger software standards in safety critical applications in particular so that software 'engineering' actually starts to deserve that label so I have no problem with a good faith version of that take.
- midasuni 4y ago
  Ok. Go back 5 years and standardise on the ubiquitous usb-mini — usb-a solution. Why does my next phone need a charger? I’d be happy with wireless charging — especially if I have a 3.5mm socket in the phone too.
  - kaibee 4y ago
    It would have been bad to standardize on USB-B and it will be good to standardize on USB-C. These aren't mutually exclusive statements.
  - tremon 4y ago
    What do you mean with "go back 5 years"? You're aware that things were already standardized on USB Micro-B in 2009? This is just an update to the existing situation, with one slight but important difference: while under the previous MoU Apple was still allowed to buck the trend, this new legislation will force Apple to fall in line. For the rest of the industry, nothing will change. In 2009, the Commission facilitated a voluntary memorandum of understanding (MoU), signed by major producers, that aimed to guarantee interoperability between chargers and mobile phones on the EU market. The MoU resulted in a significant reduction of available charger types and a convergence to USB Micro-B connectors on the device side: while there were more than 30 proprietary chargers on the EU market in 2009, by 2012 (a year after the MoU started to apply), nine in ten new devices supported the USB Micro-B connection. (from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698819/EPRS_BRI(2021)698819_EN.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/6988...)
Daishiman 4y ago
> Innovation, particularly disruptive and / or breakthrough innovation, does not happen by committee, no matter how many times over history people tried deluding themselves into thinking that it does. You have no evidence to back this up. There's been throughout history many innovative standards that have gone through committee work, including a ton of network protocols.
whiskey14 4y ago
I guess a lot of the other replies here are saying the same thing. Innovation is first. Standardisation is second. That way, more people can make use of and innovate further on the original idea.
brodock 4y ago
They happen between walled gardens, them they sponsor a comitee to turn into a standard. The only difference between current and standard based is a bunch of extra burocracy where your competitor will try to fit their custom walled garden extension that is hard to implement to give them an edge.
mitchdoogle 4y ago
One of the companies can continue to do research into new cable technologies, and when they've found something that is amazing they can present it to the committee for approval as the new standard. The committee is not there to innovate, it is there to ensure that everyone is using the same thing, which is a benefit to (most) consumers.

cm2187 4y ago

In fact interoperability is what enables innovation, vs walled gardens.

bsnal 4y ago
Seems like history of computing goes against this
- Ekaros 4y ago
  PC and x86 took us pretty far... And that was mostly carried on interoperability... I doubt we would have gotten to technology being as ubiquitous as it is without it.
  - GuB-42 4y ago
    Also, the internet itself.
    - nickpp 4y ago
      Funny enough, France's failed internet, the Minitel would probably be the solution pushed today by the EU. The Internet won on the free market, through its own merits. No politician intervention necessary. Even if plenty tried to capture the glory (information superhighway…)
      - tremon 4y ago
        Do you have any credible sources to base that claim on, other than "let's paint the government as idiots"? Did you know that TCP/IP was based on that other "failed" french network, Cyclades? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CYCLADES https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CYCLADES
  - ranguna 4y ago
    I'm all in favour the EU doing what it's doing, but x86 is actually a good example to not enforce this standard. Imagine that the EU enforced x86 as well, what would've happened to ARM ?

tediousdemise 4y ago

It's kind of sad to me that Apple doesn't make Lightning an open standard. In all my years, I haven't had a single Lightning connector fail on me. The solid metal where the contacts reside is just too robust to wear out or get damaged (unless you somehow step on it the right way or let it corrode). USB-C connectors, on the other hand, seems to loosen after a rather small number mates and de-mates, leading people to use preemptive workarounds such as magnetic connectors.

baq 4y ago
The cables though… they used to be a joke. I’ve wrapped mine with electrical tape near ends so they last longer.
- tediousdemise 4y ago
  Definitely, those Apple-supplied cables suck hard. Adding little tension relief springs[0] to the ends can protect them if you don't want to buy another (or more robust) cable and create more e-waste. You can find the springs in clicky pens. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCIo8xGTUX0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCIo8xGTUX0
  - WanderPanda 4y ago
    The Apple supplied cables seem to be quite environmentally friendly already since they literally rot at the ends. Not only lightning but also the MagSafe ones. The Lightning connector itself mechanically is the best connector I've ever encountered, though. Pure satisfaction when plugging it in, even after 5 years or so
- Larrikin 4y ago
  I think at some point they changed the material. I had never had a single cord fray on me except every single Apple supplied white cord for years, until suddenly I no longer had that problem. Don't know what changed but glad it did
  - 4y ago

ZekeSulastin 4y ago

“The regulation actually says that cables can no longer be bundled with the devices themselves” I don’t think anyone’s mentioned that. Oh my god, tech social media is going to melt down when that kicks in if the reaction to chargers being excluded is any indication (not to mention a repeat of the shift from 30-pin to Lightning in Apple’s case, except now without a cable).

enkid 4y ago
If it comes with being able to buy a $5 cable to act as a charge, I don't see how people could complain. (But I know they will.)
- phkahler 4y ago
  >> If it comes with being able to buy a $5 cable to act as a charge, I don't see how people could complain. Even better, just use the old cable from your old device since they won't be designing a new one every other year.
  - kennywinker 4y ago
    As far as a I know, in the history of smartphones - which I'd say starts in 2007 with the launch of the iPhone - there have only really been 4 (or maybe 5) connectors used on widely sold phones: 1. Apple 30pin "iPod" connector 2. Apple Lightning connector 3. Mini USB (I don't think this ever appeared on anything but blackberries and cheapo flip phones?) 4. Micro USB 5. USB-C So, while I agree that cable changes are annoying, and I support standardization efforts, "a new one every other year" is just not how it's ever been. 5 connectors in 15 years. The 30pin connector reigned from 2007 to 2012, and on the android side, micro USB was dominant until around 2015-2016 when USB-C started showing up on phones. Realistically, it's been a new connector every ~7 years.
    - sydd 4y ago
      Except that the current USB-C situation is a mess, and this regulation plans to solve this. I got a pretty expensive HP monitor for work from my company that connects via USB-C (and can charge my Mac). IT has sworn me to not loose its USB-C cable because for some unknown reasons it refuses to work with other cables, it costs >$100 and is constantly out of stock.

robonerd 4y ago

I don't see why "What about innovation?" is taken seriously as an argument anyway. USB-C is more than adequate, we could coast with it for the next hundred years. Nobody is kept up at night by the lack of innovation in AC power plugs, the standards countries have settled on today, while not all equivalent, are all generally satisfactory in practice. Problem solved; stop fixing that which ain't broke and move on to other matters. Yeah yeah, "640k should be enough for everybody". There comes a point where that is actually true.

solarkraft 4y ago
> Nobody is kept up at night by the lack of innovation in AC power plugs Mandatory Tom Scott video about bri'ish power plugs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEfP1OKKz_Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEfP1OKKz_Q :-)
- tleilaxu 4y ago
  British plugs are the only thing I will ever get nationalistic about. They’re great. Hurt like a sod to stand on if the prongs are face up though!
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - kyriakos 4y ago
    Being in an ex British colony it's one of the good things left to us from that time but unfortunately it means we need adaptors wherever we travel.
- avar 4y ago
  That's a good overview of the features of UK plugs, but a terrible one for establishing the supposed superiority of the UK design. Much of what he describes is e.g. a feature of Schuko plugs/sockets. The main distinguishing feature of the UK design is a technical workaround for a problem that no longer exists (WWII copper shortage requiring the embedded fuse).

nonethewiser 4y ago

> The regulation actually says that cables can no longer be bundled with the devices themselves, Wait, what? That's idiotic

thomasahle 4y ago
Idiotic? It's a pretty smart and simple way to incentivice manufacturers to ship devices that work with standard USB-C cables. It may be annoying if you don't already own a bunch of USB-C cables. But who doesn't?
- cypress66 4y ago
  But now you have people complaining that their device doesn't work, charges slowly, transfers slowly because they are using a crappy cable they got from Amazon. Especially for devices that require quite high end cables.

alerighi 4y ago

I think this is a stupid thing. Repurposing a commonly used connector for other things to reuse cheap connectors and cables is something that is usually done in the electronic industry (e.g. my oscilloscope use an HDMI socket for the logic analyzer input, you have plenty of lines and the connector is cheap and good). It's not uncommon to design a board and use type-C only for power (5V input, without the circuitry to handle power delivery, so you must connect a suitable power supply) or for other things (TTL serial data). > Fake USB-C cables like Nintendo's that have the right shape but do not adhere to spec should gradually disappear along with lightning cables Which spec? There are a multitude of them! What we do, adhere all to the best spec and to only feed 5V power to a device (that could be done with 2 wires) require the same cable used to connect a thunderbolt device at 40Gb/s? Of course not, since the first one costs a couple of dollars, the second one tens of dollars, the first one can be as long as voltage drop permits it to be, the second one needs to be maximum 1 meter, the first one needs no shielding at all, the second one needs to be heavily shielded, that not only increases cost but makes it bulkier. And again, does a data cable that is used for thunderbolt connection (assuming that the thunderbolt device is externally powered) be designed to carry the full 5A of the spec? 5A is a lot of current, it will require bigger conductors, but for a data cable it doesn't make sense! Type-C is a standard that makes to me not a lot of sense: they wanted to create the one connector that fits all, while in the past they designed different connector, one for each device, not because they wanted you to buy more cables but to avoid confusion in customers, if the cable fits it works I used to say back in the day, the VGA connector was physically different from a serial port, the PS2 connector was not the same as a parallel port, even if they could have done everything with one port they didn't.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
groby_b 4y ago
> Of course not, since the first one costs a couple of dollars, the second one tens of dollars, Of course yes. If the industry was stupid enough to put all of this behind a single plug, then single cable it is. Because pretty much every consumer who has more than one USB3/C cable is dead tired of "oh. This combo doesn't work, let me root for the other cables" Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

maccard 4y ago

I was one of the Nintendo switch commenters in this thread - the problem I have is standardising on the connector without enforcing the underlying standards. This doesn't fix the charging problem or the cable problem, it just means that the all devices fit together, even if they don't actually deliver what they're supposed to.

shaded-enmity 4y ago

No it's not fine, this is just another coercion and consolidation of power where it shouldn't belong. Independent entities cannot innovate on their own because now there's a central apparatus that decides what should be innovated and how, with all the inherent political power struggles of big players, good luck. EU should be there to set goals, not to dictate implementation.

burlesona 4y ago

Just imagine if this had been done in the 90s, we’d be stuck on VGA cables for all video and wouldn’t have hi-def TV. Strict regulation causes ossification.

bloppe 4y ago
The regulation does not require devices to only support USB-C, just that they at least support USB-C for charging. They can always have multiple ports. If the 40Gbps offered by USB-C is really not enough for you, then your device is probably big enough that multiple ports does not mess up your device's form factor. Also, the regulation does not require devices to support USB-C forever, just that all devices support the same open charging standard. That standard can and will evolve over time; maybe not as fast as it would if not regulated, but it's pretty contrived to think it would actually stifle innovation.
makeitdouble 4y ago
The EU did it before, forcing phone manufacturers to move to micro-usb https://www.wired.com/2009/06/europe-gets-universal-cellphone-charger-in-2010/ https://www.wired.com/2009/06/europe-gets-universal-cellphon... From memory, Apple argued for an exception and got it approved for its products. So, having this kind of directive doesn't block special products, nor has any specific impact on the field evolving healthily. If anything, without this kind of regulation we'd probably still have 95 different charging cable standards.
- zaarn 4y ago
  Apple didn't quite got an approved exception, the previous agreement on micro-USB was essentially a non-binding agreement between the industry and the EU. With the heavy implication that if it's not adhered to, then the EU will make it a regulation or directive. Apple adhered by letter by making chargers USB and the phone not have USB, contrary to what the agreement wanted to achieve in spirit. The EU approving this directive is simply the logical end conclusion of apple (and some small fish) not playing ball when asked to.

dwaite 4y ago

The problem isn't generally fake cables, it is: 1. Cables have radically different capabilities - they may charge at 60W, 100W or 240W ; they may be limited to 480 mbps transmission rates or go all the way up to 40 gbps transmission. Up until now, the market has not regulated such that you can tell the difference when you grab a random cable, or necessarily tell the difference at time of purchase 2. Devices like the Nintendo Switch and Raspberry Pi shipped with broken implementations. For instance, the RPi would not work with cables that _supported_ over 60W charging rates.

AlchemistCamp 4y ago

> Other people saying "what about innovation!?" That's fine. Let's say the USB consortium releases USB-D with input from Apple, Google, and many other stakeholders. The EU can set another deadline for newly released devices to adhere to the new version instead of the old one. The transition will involve a period of time where older devices are still on C and newer ones on D, which is totally compatible with the regulation and is necessary with or without regulation. If your idea of "innovation" is moving from one version of a spec to another version of the same spec requiring multiple trillion dollar companies and the EU setting a timeline, then your usage of the word is much narrower than mine. Many advances that I consider truly innovative have often come from outsiders without the backing of the largest companies in the world and succeeded from the bottom up.

ecnahc515 4y ago

> and you would just buy a real one to work with all your devices. Except that could kill your Nintendo switch, and it's not like Nintendo is going to change how their hardware works on something that's already been released to the masses.

strbean 4y ago
> Except that could kill your Nintendo switch That's strictly an issue of atrocious hardware design in the switch and nothing else. >[...] it's not like Nintendo is going to change how their hardware works on something that's already been released to the masses. They will if they want to continue selling them in the EU after the deadline.