5 ms·

Ah yes, that magic new port that dose something we can't do, but nobody can pinpoint what it is or why we need it. It's been a decade since a new port (lightni

Ah yes, that magic new port that dose something we can't do, but nobody can pinpoint what it is or why we need it. It's been a decade since a new port (lightning was 2012, usb-c is 2014). So apparently, they are doing pretty well! I think my answer here would "enjoy the next decade of benefits and worry about it then?"

eecc 4y ago
Except that’s exactly what Lightning was in the world of (mini, micro, nano) USB2. Try again
nickpp 4y ago
USB-C itself was that "magic" new port 10 years ago. EU at the time was recommending standardization on the abomination that was micro-USB. Luckily they didn’t make alternatives illegal, like now, or you’d never have seen your much beloved USB-C.
- selfmodruntime 4y ago
  Instead of mandating the standard to be used, they should've mandated that phone vendors agree on one standard, with a revision every x years or so.
  - crote 4y ago
    Luckily, that is exactly what happened! The law explicitly states that it will be reviewed every few years to determine whether USB-C is still the best choice.
    - nickpp 4y ago
      And why would a better choice magically appear though when it’s illegal to put it on the market to let it prove itself? Why would anybody who is actually innovative pay to research and risk such a better choice in the first place? To wait for its review in a few years?!
      - heavyset_go 4y ago
        This is indeed what literally happens in tons of sectors where standards are adopted or mandated by law.
        mrguyorama 4y ago
        It's insane how entitled tech companies are. They see perfectly normal and useful for the consumer standardization as oppression.
      - maigret 4y ago
        Sounds like you describe how aviation and other critical tech work. Every single piece has to be checked and validated by the administration, and yet planes keep flying.
  - AdamN 4y ago
    The ideal is two or maybe even three standards. Having one means that upgrading to any new standard would never actually be possible.
mig39 4y ago
When this was first proposed in the EU, the connected they wanted to mandate was the "standard" at the time. USB Mini-B. Which is now deprecated and a few generations behind. And the same arguments were made at the time. "Stifle innovation" and "what innovation, this connector is perfect. No need for improvement."
- ok_dad 4y ago
  > When this was first proposed Well, it's a good thing they UPDATED the bill that eventually became law, right? I guess they could probably do that again, if necessary!
  - brokenkebaby 4y ago
    They technically can, but making such update is not like making a correction in google docs, it easyly can take years. And as always in politics there will be some well-established players interested in keeping outdated standard in place. I like USB-C way more, and frankly don't like Apple that much at all, but let's not pretend lawfare doesn't have collateral damage.
    - ok_dad 4y ago
      In everything in life, there are trade-offs between different solutions. Personally, I like having just one connector for chargers even if it takes a few extra years to update. I don't think it will, someone else in this thread mentioned the actual connectors aren't in the law but rather a description of a process that the standards org has to perform when updating the approved connector(s) list.
      - brokenkebaby 4y ago
        I do like the same thing. That's why I don't buy Apple things for personal use, and it doesn't even feel like a trade-off. I may agree with using blunt and stupidly heavy weapon which is gov't (in this case supragov't) against power of some monopoly. However, charger doesn't look like that case at all. I think it was picked simply because it makes a nice populist move, and not because it has significant impact on a significant number of customers.

eecc 4y ago

Except that’s exactly what Lightning was in the world of (mini, micro, nano) USB2. Try again

nickpp 4y ago

USB-C itself was that "magic" new port 10 years ago. EU at the time was recommending standardization on the abomination that was micro-USB. Luckily they didn’t make alternatives illegal, like now, or you’d never have seen your much beloved USB-C.

selfmodruntime 4y ago
Instead of mandating the standard to be used, they should've mandated that phone vendors agree on one standard, with a revision every x years or so.
- crote 4y ago
  Luckily, that is exactly what happened! The law explicitly states that it will be reviewed every few years to determine whether USB-C is still the best choice.
  - nickpp 4y ago
    And why would a better choice magically appear though when it’s illegal to put it on the market to let it prove itself? Why would anybody who is actually innovative pay to research and risk such a better choice in the first place? To wait for its review in a few years?!
    - heavyset_go 4y ago
      This is indeed what literally happens in tons of sectors where standards are adopted or mandated by law.
      - mrguyorama 4y ago
        It's insane how entitled tech companies are. They see perfectly normal and useful for the consumer standardization as oppression.
    - maigret 4y ago
      Sounds like you describe how aviation and other critical tech work. Every single piece has to be checked and validated by the administration, and yet planes keep flying.
- AdamN 4y ago
  The ideal is two or maybe even three standards. Having one means that upgrading to any new standard would never actually be possible.

mig39 4y ago

When this was first proposed in the EU, the connected they wanted to mandate was the "standard" at the time. USB Mini-B. Which is now deprecated and a few generations behind. And the same arguments were made at the time. "Stifle innovation" and "what innovation, this connector is perfect. No need for improvement."

ok_dad 4y ago
> When this was first proposed Well, it's a good thing they UPDATED the bill that eventually became law, right? I guess they could probably do that again, if necessary!
- brokenkebaby 4y ago
  They technically can, but making such update is not like making a correction in google docs, it easyly can take years. And as always in politics there will be some well-established players interested in keeping outdated standard in place. I like USB-C way more, and frankly don't like Apple that much at all, but let's not pretend lawfare doesn't have collateral damage.
  - ok_dad 4y ago
    In everything in life, there are trade-offs between different solutions. Personally, I like having just one connector for chargers even if it takes a few extra years to update. I don't think it will, someone else in this thread mentioned the actual connectors aren't in the law but rather a description of a process that the standards org has to perform when updating the approved connector(s) list.
    - brokenkebaby 4y ago
      I do like the same thing. That's why I don't buy Apple things for personal use, and it doesn't even feel like a trade-off. I may agree with using blunt and stupidly heavy weapon which is gov't (in this case supragov't) against power of some monopoly. However, charger doesn't look like that case at all. I think it was picked simply because it makes a nice populist move, and not because it has significant impact on a significant number of customers.