5 ms·

Am I missing something here? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.engadget.com/amp/2010-12-29-european-standardization-bodies-formalize-micro-usb-cellphone-ch.html

Am I missing something here? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.engadget.com/amp/2010-12-29-european-standardization-bodies-formalize-micro-usb-cellphone-ch.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.engadget.com/amp/2010-12-29...

amarshall 4y ago
Non-AMP link: https://www.engadget.com/2010-12-29-european-standardization-bodies-formalize-micro-usb-cellphone-ch.html https://www.engadget.com/2010-12-29-european-standardization...
MichaelZuo 4y ago
There were non-binding agreements. i.e. the EU hoped that the major players would standardize on one connecter, but this did not have the force of law behind it.
ThePowerOfFuet 4y ago
It looks like you shared an AMP link. AMP is controversial because of concerns over privacy and the Open Web [0]. Fully-cached AMP pages like the one you shared are especially problematic. Maybe check out the canonical page instead: https://www.engadget.com/2010-12-29-european-standardization-bodies-formalize-micro-usb-cellphone-ch.html https://www.engadget.com/2010-12-29-european-standardization... [0]: https://old.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z https://old.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
w4rh4wk5 4y ago
Clicking that link in Firefox prompts me to download a font. LOL
- fao_ 4y ago
  On Chrome under linux, it actually does nothing other than download the font! lmao
dahfizz 4y ago
The EU created a technical standard (which basically just says, "use USB Micro-B"). Phone manufacturers voluntarily signed a Memorandum of Understanding, stating that they all agreed to abide by the standard. None of it was binding or involuntary. Which is why Apple never released a micro-B phone and all other manufacturers were able to upgrade to USB-C.
- origin_path 4y ago
  Of course it was binding and involuntary, as the EU is now proving by binding the ones that didn't volunteer. "Do it or else" doesn't make it voluntary because the institution doing the "or else" part is slow.
  - dahfizz 4y ago
    The point is about innovation. Maybe you think the original nonbinding agreement had a threat of force behind it, but it had no immediate consequences if manufacturers changed ports. Manufacturers were allowed to upgrade to new ports. And they did. That is how we got the innovation of USB-C. Manufacturers are no longer able to upgrade to better ports. People saying "this won't stifle innovation because we still got USB-C" have things totally backwards.

amarshall 4y ago

Non-AMP link: https://www.engadget.com/2010-12-29-european-standardization-bodies-formalize-micro-usb-cellphone-ch.html https://www.engadget.com/2010-12-29-european-standardization...

MichaelZuo 4y ago

There were non-binding agreements. i.e. the EU hoped that the major players would standardize on one connecter, but this did not have the force of law behind it.

ThePowerOfFuet 4y ago

It looks like you shared an AMP link. AMP is controversial because of concerns over privacy and the Open Web [0]. Fully-cached AMP pages like the one you shared are especially problematic. Maybe check out the canonical page instead: https://www.engadget.com/2010-12-29-european-standardization-bodies-formalize-micro-usb-cellphone-ch.html https://www.engadget.com/2010-12-29-european-standardization... [0]: https://old.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z https://old.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

w4rh4wk5 4y ago

Clicking that link in Firefox prompts me to download a font. LOL

fao_ 4y ago
On Chrome under linux, it actually does nothing other than download the font! lmao

dahfizz 4y ago

The EU created a technical standard (which basically just says, "use USB Micro-B"). Phone manufacturers voluntarily signed a Memorandum of Understanding, stating that they all agreed to abide by the standard. None of it was binding or involuntary. Which is why Apple never released a micro-B phone and all other manufacturers were able to upgrade to USB-C.

origin_path 4y ago
Of course it was binding and involuntary, as the EU is now proving by binding the ones that didn't volunteer. "Do it or else" doesn't make it voluntary because the institution doing the "or else" part is slow.
- dahfizz 4y ago
  The point is about innovation. Maybe you think the original nonbinding agreement had a threat of force behind it, but it had no immediate consequences if manufacturers changed ports. Manufacturers were allowed to upgrade to new ports. And they did. That is how we got the innovation of USB-C. Manufacturers are no longer able to upgrade to better ports. People saying "this won't stifle innovation because we still got USB-C" have things totally backwards.