5 ms·

I’m pretty skeptical lawmakers are the best ones to make technical decisions like this.

by charliea0 4y ago

iancmceachern 4y ago
It's not really a technical decision.
arcticbull 4y ago
Clearly Apple wasn't making the leap, so I'm ok with them getting a shove.
- olliej 4y ago
  So to be clear your belief is that Apple should have shipped micro-usb instead of lightning? Or is your belief that Apple should aggressively make users replace all their accessories?
  - foepys 4y ago
    There was never a law demanding Micro-USB. The availability of USB-C phones for 5+ years should be be proof enough. The previous iteration of the law in the OP only encouraged the industry to get together and make a decision to use a single connector. This didn't happen because Apple just refused to participate and now the lawmakers are sick of it and stepped it up.
    - olliej 4y ago
      > This didn't happen because Apple just refused to participate and now the lawmakers are sick of it and stepped it up. Apple had a huge number of existing users, with existing accessories, before usb-c was even standardized, let alone before it was available in quantity. Look at how people complained about apple dropping the 30pin connector, and replacing it with something superior in every single way - how do you think that would have gone? Hell when the usb-c macbooks started coming out people complained incessantly about no one having usb-c. This bizarre belief that there is absolutely no reason to not have switched to usb-c is annoying BS - there is very clearly a tradeoff, and Apple didn't think it was worth it. I'm going with what others in the thread have said, and expect any plug at all to disappear. Although then it sounds like Brazil will have a shit fit about that instead.
      - foepys 4y ago
        Apple obviously didn't think it was worth it. They sold billions of adapters and licenses for the lightning connector.
        arcticbull 4y ago
        Thing is they can still do that with the USB Type-C Authentication Specification. It's really confusing to me why they decided not to just do it. They may get rid of the physical connectors but wireless charging is already Qi, PAN connectivity is already Bluetooth and WiFi - all of which are industry standards. If they insist, what did we really lose? I guess efficiency of charge?
ls15 4y ago
The companies apparently weren't able to decide in the interest of the consumer, so they needed a bit of help here.
frosted-flakes 4y ago
Compare it to electrical power socket regulations. Nobody thinks that should be a free-for-all the way it was in the early days of commercialized electricity, so why would standard power/data ports be any different? Of course, power sockets differ country to country, but that's only because these things were cemented in place long before it mattered, and now it would be extremely difficult to change. But most countries have settled on a single plug/socket design, and that is due to government regulation.

I’m pretty skeptical lawmakers are the best ones to make technical decisions like this.

iancmceachern 4y ago

It's not really a technical decision.

arcticbull 4y ago

Clearly Apple wasn't making the leap, so I'm ok with them getting a shove.

olliej 4y ago
So to be clear your belief is that Apple should have shipped micro-usb instead of lightning? Or is your belief that Apple should aggressively make users replace all their accessories?
- foepys 4y ago
  There was never a law demanding Micro-USB. The availability of USB-C phones for 5+ years should be be proof enough. The previous iteration of the law in the OP only encouraged the industry to get together and make a decision to use a single connector. This didn't happen because Apple just refused to participate and now the lawmakers are sick of it and stepped it up.
  - olliej 4y ago
    > This didn't happen because Apple just refused to participate and now the lawmakers are sick of it and stepped it up. Apple had a huge number of existing users, with existing accessories, before usb-c was even standardized, let alone before it was available in quantity. Look at how people complained about apple dropping the 30pin connector, and replacing it with something superior in every single way - how do you think that would have gone? Hell when the usb-c macbooks started coming out people complained incessantly about no one having usb-c. This bizarre belief that there is absolutely no reason to not have switched to usb-c is annoying BS - there is very clearly a tradeoff, and Apple didn't think it was worth it. I'm going with what others in the thread have said, and expect any plug at all to disappear. Although then it sounds like Brazil will have a shit fit about that instead.
    - foepys 4y ago
      Apple obviously didn't think it was worth it. They sold billions of adapters and licenses for the lightning connector.
      - arcticbull 4y ago
        Thing is they can still do that with the USB Type-C Authentication Specification. It's really confusing to me why they decided not to just do it. They may get rid of the physical connectors but wireless charging is already Qi, PAN connectivity is already Bluetooth and WiFi - all of which are industry standards. If they insist, what did we really lose? I guess efficiency of charge?

ls15 4y ago

The companies apparently weren't able to decide in the interest of the consumer, so they needed a bit of help here.

frosted-flakes 4y ago

Compare it to electrical power socket regulations. Nobody thinks that should be a free-for-all the way it was in the early days of commercialized electricity, so why would standard power/data ports be any different? Of course, power sockets differ country to country, but that's only because these things were cemented in place long before it mattered, and now it would be extremely difficult to change. But most countries have settled on a single plug/socket design, and that is due to government regulation.