6 ms·

No, actually, you wouldn't. As has been explained many times in this thread, that isn't how this kind of regulation works. I do understand that doesn't fit your

No, actually, you wouldn't. As has been explained many times in this thread, that isn't how this kind of regulation works. I do understand that doesn't fit your narrative though. Rather than making lots of unfounded assertions about what "will" happen, as you keep doing, I would encourage you to actually read the details first.

scarface74 4y ago
Say I as a manufacturer have a new better connection than USB-C. How do I release my new connection without getting the entire industries buy in? If this had happened with computers, Apple would have been forced to include PS/2 slots and ISA instead of the much better ADB and Nubus slots.
- zaarn 4y ago
  You release the product with both ports. And then you tell the EU that you'd like your port to be approved as valid alternative. You'll probably have to explain why your connector is better as well as show that consumers won't suffer the cable problem due to the new port (ie, people won't have to buy adapters or chargers just for your device). Then the EU is probably happy to add your port to the directive (which as the directive explains, is a very lightweight process, it doesn't require relegislating anything), possibly even give other vendors a timeline to switch to it if USB-C is to be deprecated. Of course, you're likely going to have to license patents are low prices or risk the EU getting angry over exploitation of the market. Possibly even hand out patents for free and only charge a minor fee for the connector trademarks (like current USB).
  - ubermonkey 4y ago
    "You release the product with both ports." This requirement kills the new port in its crib.
    - zaarn 4y ago
      It's that or adapters. Adapters might be more acceptable as interim solution for products where that matters. I was more thinking of application like Laptops, where you can have multiple different ports already without issue.
      - scarface74 4y ago
        Everything you are saying is making the product worse. You realize that laptops are a lot bigger phones?
        zaarn 4y ago
        I don't see how that's worse. If you make such a good connector that it should replace all currently used charger ports, there should be a requirement to allow users to give them the time to switch. To not cause untold costs to poor people who can't afford to switch. Interim solutions provide value to society. And laptops aren't bigger phones.
        scarface74 4y ago
        The device is going to come with at least one cord. How many people can afford at minimum a $429 phone who can’t afford a couple of extra cables? “poor people aren’t buying iPhones”. But they are buying Androids that are not being supported by their manufactures with even security updates shortly after they buy them.
        zaarn 4y ago
        Cheap Androids not being supported by manufacturers is a separated issue, I fail to see how that applies here. Atleast the cheap phones have a unified charger so poor people don't have to keep buying chargers for them.
        scarface74 4y ago
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Wow that’s a lot better solution. How long would that have taken Apple to change to lightning instead of using the 30 pin connector? What would they have used for the original iPod if they had to wait on the government to approve a connector? If this same type of law had been in effect with computers back in the 90s Apple would have had to include PS/2 and ISA and add more ports.
    - zaarn 4y ago
      That's the point though, there is no more 30 pin connector. And if there is a change, the government ensures consumers won't be wasting money because their old 30-pin chargers are now paperweights or their old phone has no more chargers available. Also I don't see how this connects to PS2 or ISA, since back then such regulation wasn't in huge demand yet. The charger issue however is a demand and it seems to be backed by the general population. Having one charger for all devices is a big plus for everyone involved. And if you somehow develop a new charger port that is much much better, then yes, it should have to go through the process of being approved, so that we don't start hopping into new charging ports every 10 years. That would make the entire regulation worthless. And yes that might mean your port has to be interoperable or you need to have both ports (USB AB is an example, which fit both A and B plugs, for micro and mini variants) or easily allow an adapter you can leave plugged into the phone (in-plug adapter). We're much further into the development into computers and the future of USB-C is less uncertain as PS/2 and ISA. USB-C is a good-enough compromise that can most likely handle the next 30 years of computer needs. The market isn't as quickly evolving in that direction anymore, IMO.
      - scarface74 4y ago
        The 30 pin adapter was better than all of the alternatives at the time. It took Apple 8 months to go from idea to shipping product. How much longer would it have taken if they had to wait for the government? You really think consumers care more about replacing ten dollar cords for their phones than having to replace their phones because Android manufactures don’t provide support for their phones more than a year? 30 years ago, my computer had SCSI (which was a cross platform standard), ADB, and Nubus ports - all better than the industry standard. That would have never happened with government mandating standards. I used my own free will and voted with my dollars to choose to be incompatible- just like Apple users today.

scarface74 4y ago

Say I as a manufacturer have a new better connection than USB-C. How do I release my new connection without getting the entire industries buy in? If this had happened with computers, Apple would have been forced to include PS/2 slots and ISA instead of the much better ADB and Nubus slots.

zaarn 4y ago
You release the product with both ports. And then you tell the EU that you'd like your port to be approved as valid alternative. You'll probably have to explain why your connector is better as well as show that consumers won't suffer the cable problem due to the new port (ie, people won't have to buy adapters or chargers just for your device). Then the EU is probably happy to add your port to the directive (which as the directive explains, is a very lightweight process, it doesn't require relegislating anything), possibly even give other vendors a timeline to switch to it if USB-C is to be deprecated. Of course, you're likely going to have to license patents are low prices or risk the EU getting angry over exploitation of the market. Possibly even hand out patents for free and only charge a minor fee for the connector trademarks (like current USB).
- ubermonkey 4y ago
  "You release the product with both ports." This requirement kills the new port in its crib.
  - zaarn 4y ago
    It's that or adapters. Adapters might be more acceptable as interim solution for products where that matters. I was more thinking of application like Laptops, where you can have multiple different ports already without issue.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      Everything you are saying is making the product worse. You realize that laptops are a lot bigger phones?
      - zaarn 4y ago
        I don't see how that's worse. If you make such a good connector that it should replace all currently used charger ports, there should be a requirement to allow users to give them the time to switch. To not cause untold costs to poor people who can't afford to switch. Interim solutions provide value to society. And laptops aren't bigger phones.
        scarface74 4y ago
        The device is going to come with at least one cord. How many people can afford at minimum a $429 phone who can’t afford a couple of extra cables? “poor people aren’t buying iPhones”. But they are buying Androids that are not being supported by their manufactures with even security updates shortly after they buy them.
        zaarn 4y ago
        Cheap Androids not being supported by manufacturers is a separated issue, I fail to see how that applies here. Atleast the cheap phones have a unified charger so poor people don't have to keep buying chargers for them.
        scarface74 4y ago
- scarface74 4y ago
  Wow that’s a lot better solution. How long would that have taken Apple to change to lightning instead of using the 30 pin connector? What would they have used for the original iPod if they had to wait on the government to approve a connector? If this same type of law had been in effect with computers back in the 90s Apple would have had to include PS/2 and ISA and add more ports.
  - zaarn 4y ago
    That's the point though, there is no more 30 pin connector. And if there is a change, the government ensures consumers won't be wasting money because their old 30-pin chargers are now paperweights or their old phone has no more chargers available. Also I don't see how this connects to PS2 or ISA, since back then such regulation wasn't in huge demand yet. The charger issue however is a demand and it seems to be backed by the general population. Having one charger for all devices is a big plus for everyone involved. And if you somehow develop a new charger port that is much much better, then yes, it should have to go through the process of being approved, so that we don't start hopping into new charging ports every 10 years. That would make the entire regulation worthless. And yes that might mean your port has to be interoperable or you need to have both ports (USB AB is an example, which fit both A and B plugs, for micro and mini variants) or easily allow an adapter you can leave plugged into the phone (in-plug adapter). We're much further into the development into computers and the future of USB-C is less uncertain as PS/2 and ISA. USB-C is a good-enough compromise that can most likely handle the next 30 years of computer needs. The market isn't as quickly evolving in that direction anymore, IMO.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      The 30 pin adapter was better than all of the alternatives at the time. It took Apple 8 months to go from idea to shipping product. How much longer would it have taken if they had to wait for the government? You really think consumers care more about replacing ten dollar cords for their phones than having to replace their phones because Android manufactures don’t provide support for their phones more than a year? 30 years ago, my computer had SCSI (which was a cross platform standard), ADB, and Nubus ports - all better than the industry standard. That would have never happened with government mandating standards. I used my own free will and voted with my dollars to choose to be incompatible- just like Apple users today.