5 ms·
Europe already did what you described: standardized charge port standard (CCS2) and Tesla chargers already open to non-Tesla vehicles. It was glorious. The Uni
by kccqzy 3y ago
Europe already did what you described: standardized charge port standard (CCS2) and Tesla chargers already open to non-Tesla vehicles. It was glorious.
The United States dropped the ball here.
- MBCook 3y agoOur government doesn’t do anti-business things like pick winners and losers. We let the market do a 15 year free-for-all so we can end up with as many incompatible options as possible. We don’t support communist concepts like sharing and working together. —- /s, obviously. They should have picked something before a ton of DC chargers had to be built with multiple connectors, both of which are now dead.
- samatman 3y agoDo you know what a DE-9 port is, by any chance? I'm glad the federal government isn't forcing computer manufacturers to include them. Guess we better hope USB-C is the best port a phone can possibly have, because the EU is hell-bent on locking it in for eternity.
- bombcar 3y agoHow exactly did the EU define "USB-C" because there are all sorts of ways it could have been defined that leave wiggle-room for future advancements (even now, I believe the USB-C port on an iPhone may actually be a Thunderbolt port ...)
- kwhitefoot 3y agoIt only concerns charging not data.
- kwhitefoot 3y ago> the EU is hell-bent on locking it in for eternity. No it hasn't. The EU Commission also gets the right to examine future common charging solutions. Also your comparison is not apt. The USB-C port is not required if the device does not require a wired charging port just as a computing device without a serial interface does not need a DB9 connector.
- samatman 3y ago> The EU Commission also gets the right to examine future common charging solutions. What future common charging solutions? You mean the ones which are illegal to sell? Bit of a chicken and egg dilemma, mes non?
- smoldesu 3y agoTesla, Apple, and any other upstart business is entirely welcome to submit their connector or cable standard to the appropriate forum for evaluation. Because they avoid this, they get targeted by corrective legislation. Particularly when they take Apple's pathetic example of charging a licensing fee for class-compliant serial connectors.
- kube-system 3y agoThe US's reluctance to regulate emerging tech is both why they take longer to standardize, and it's also part of the reason why so much emerging tech comes from the US. It's a trade-off.
- panick21_ 3y agoAs a consequence Europe has a much worse standard and the US has a better one. Tesla should have opened the spec much earlier (independent from if they actually wanted other car companies to use their super charger). Had Tesla done this they would be in a much better position now.
- kwhitefoot 3y agoWhat was not open? Tesla chargers have had CCS-2 in Europe for nearly six years now.
- panick21_ 3y agoThe Tesla charger standard was not open. The Tesla charger standard is older then CCS-2. My point is Tesla should have made its design a standard, even before CCS-2. And my point about North America was that now North America has a better standard, even if its later. The NACS Standard is better then the CCS-2 standard.