3 ms·

While I sympathize, this isn't just about A/V standards. This allows for absolutely ANYTHING, barring bandwidth concerns. Ubiquitous body computers with skin

While I sympathize, this isn't just about A/V standards. This allows for absolutely ANYTHING, barring bandwidth concerns. Ubiquitous body computers with skin access ports? We can make an interface for that. "Quantum broadcast" antenna technology? We can make a dongle for that.

buro9 14y ago
Which is precisely why I gave the example of cabling for telecommunications.
- jaegerpicker 14y ago
  Which actually doesn't make any sense. Sure copper and cable has been around for thirty years but as Google Fiber, Verzion FioS, and AT&T U-Verse show it's often required to install new cabling and other hardware. This is true of Phone (dsl upgrades) and Cable internet also. I used to work as a Subcontractor for Time Warner's Road Runner internet service when it first arrived in North East Ohio. Part of the common work was installing new routers and switches after the new cable lines were installed in the individual neighborhoods.
- tnicks 14y ago
  I find your example lacking in perspective. In telecom, even under TDM standards like SDH, SONET, etc., there were a plethora of incompatible connectors. You can have rj45, rj12, BNC (literally dozens of variations). In optics the same is true as well with SC, ST, LC, FC, etc. The last decades shift towards Ethernet everywhere is as a result of "mass" consumer desire (i.e. you guys on HN building things that use Ethernet. A protocol originally designed for a limited number of workstations in a small environment.) and that has put the RJ45 at the top for a lot of devices. Recall that 15 years ago AS400, ATM, FDDI, all had their own connectors and standards. All of this (and much more) just to send some bits over a physical connection. Just crack open a Grays catalog and go to town. For the record each of these has a purpose and reason. Some were a function of the materials present at the time others due to specific environmental concerns. I would not class any in the realm of "lock-in". Due to the capital intensive nature of the industry they each were good business decisions at the time. It wasn't as easy as buying a $40 plug.
makomk 14y ago
It's not clear that it can support "absolutely ANYTHING" for values of anything that are any greater than can be achieved with USB 2.0 OTG though. So far it hasn't.

buro9 14y ago

Which is precisely why I gave the example of cabling for telecommunications.

jaegerpicker 14y ago
Which actually doesn't make any sense. Sure copper and cable has been around for thirty years but as Google Fiber, Verzion FioS, and AT&T U-Verse show it's often required to install new cabling and other hardware. This is true of Phone (dsl upgrades) and Cable internet also. I used to work as a Subcontractor for Time Warner's Road Runner internet service when it first arrived in North East Ohio. Part of the common work was installing new routers and switches after the new cable lines were installed in the individual neighborhoods.
tnicks 14y ago
I find your example lacking in perspective. In telecom, even under TDM standards like SDH, SONET, etc., there were a plethora of incompatible connectors. You can have rj45, rj12, BNC (literally dozens of variations). In optics the same is true as well with SC, ST, LC, FC, etc. The last decades shift towards Ethernet everywhere is as a result of "mass" consumer desire (i.e. you guys on HN building things that use Ethernet. A protocol originally designed for a limited number of workstations in a small environment.) and that has put the RJ45 at the top for a lot of devices. Recall that 15 years ago AS400, ATM, FDDI, all had their own connectors and standards. All of this (and much more) just to send some bits over a physical connection. Just crack open a Grays catalog and go to town. For the record each of these has a purpose and reason. Some were a function of the materials present at the time others due to specific environmental concerns. I would not class any in the realm of "lock-in". Due to the capital intensive nature of the industry they each were good business decisions at the time. It wasn't as easy as buying a $40 plug.

makomk 14y ago

It's not clear that it can support "absolutely ANYTHING" for values of anything that are any greater than can be achieved with USB 2.0 OTG though. So far it hasn't.