Europe to require USB-C, Apple mad

[joeldf]

So is everyone doing the same thing innovation?

Again, I’m not arguing for or against, but I do believe we should allow companies to design, create and produce products the way they feel is best. Let the market choose.

It's a [mod redacted] connector. Used on many different devices. How does standardizing that affect "innovation" any more or less than standardizing the power cord connected to the wall.

Besides, it's easy enough to get around it if one really wanted to. Wi-Fi (standardized), Bluetooth (standardized), and wireless charging (also somewhat standardized). None of which provides Apple with any licensing income.

 

[anon(50597)]

I don't completely disagree with that even thinking that the "let the market choose" doesn't work always very well and many times it's just an excuse for corporate greed.

One good point in that EU proposal is to unbundle chargers. I remember that Apple's explanation was an ecological one (*sighs*). What could be more "ecological" than that having a worldwide standard?

I agree with the ecological argument. There are times when we could makes decisions that could help diminish the waste we create. I’m not sure how much an affect this would make on the entirety of our self inflicted pollution of the world but every little bit helps.

 

[anon(50597)]

It's an f'ing connector. Used on many different devices. How does standardizing that affect "innovation" any more or less than standardizing the power cord connected to the wall.

Besides, it's easy enough to get around it if one really wanted to. Wi-Fi (standardized), Bluetooth (standardized), and wireless charging (also somewhat standardized). None of which provides Apple with any licensing income.

I believe (correct me if I am wrong) that the lightning connector came out before USB-C.

The funniest thing about this is charging cables (due to innovation) will no longer be necessary soon because it will be wireless, RF or perhaps even infrared (innovation). Unless we want to tell them what to do and accept using wires forever.

 

[joeldf]

I believe (correct me if I am wrong) that the lightning connector came out before USB-C.

The funniest thing about this is charging cables (due to innovation) will no longer be necessary soon because it will be wireless, RF or perhaps even infrared (innovation). Unless we want to tell them what to do and accept using wires forever.

Serial port cables and LPT (printer) port cables preceded USB, but USB was the initial standard before Lighting. FireWire was inbetween. USB-C is just the progression from Micro-USB and Mini-USB.

 

[mustang7757]

Never thought USB-c cables would get this much attention lol

 

[Mooncatt]

The funniest thing about this is charging cables (due to innovation) will no longer be necessary soon because it will be wireless, RF or perhaps even infrared (innovation). Unless we want to tell them what to do and accept using wires forever.

That's debatable. Wireless charging is horribly inefficient, with a lot of power discharged as wasted heat. That means more emissions generated to fill a battery the same amount as wired charging.

 

[anon(50597)]

That's debatable. Wireless charging is horribly inefficient, with a lot of power discharged as wasted heat. That means more emissions generated to fill a battery the same amount as wired charging.

Sure, now, but as with most things it will improve. That’s the whole point I’m trying to make. We shouldn’t suppress innovation. I grew up with a two-party hardwired telephone line in my house. I couldn’t have imagined where we would be today.

 

[anon(50597)]

Never thought USB-c cables would get this much attention lol

And you thought it was just a wire!

 

[mustang7757]

And you thought it was just a wire!

 

[joeldf]

Sure, now, but as with most things it will improve. That’s the whole point I’m trying to make. We shouldn’t suppress innovation. I grew up with a two-party hardwired telephone line in my house. I couldn’t have imagined where we would be today.

But that hardwire line had a standardized connection for the telephone. No one complained about that somehow stifling innovation then.

In fact, how about some innovations that used that connection - facsimiles (fax machines), dial-up modems for internet access, and DSL.

It also didn't hinder further development of the phone itself, from cordless to eventually... cell phones.

 

[Chuck Finley69]

Let me clarify, for me, only my position better. I'm against the government interference because the product and company has never been standardized not for many years in the beginning, mainstream.

Apple, literally in the late 90s, almost went under due to it's non-conformist business model right down to OS at time. At time of the iPhone original introduction, everything was different, just like all other products. You even had to choose exclusive carriers. Nobody forced anyone to choose the product or it's limited ecosystem.

If the company didn't succeed, it would have been 80's-90's all over. If you don't like it's exclusivity and snobbish attitude, don't buy it. What's next? It's priced too high?

 

[anon(50597)]

But that hardwire line had a standardized connection for the telephone. No one complained about that somehow stifling innovation then.

In fact, how about some innovations that used that connection - facsimiles (fax machines), dial-up modems for internet access, and DSL.

It also didn't hinder further development of the phone itself, from cordless to eventually... cell phones.

All good points but those were different times. There was a monopoly over the telephone industry for almost 100 years: Bell. There was no competition to drive innovation or different systems. It wasn’t until competition arrived (Apple, BlackBerry, Nokia, etc) that our modern phones developed.

 

[joeldf]

All good points but those were different times. There was a monopoly over the telephone industry for almost 100 years: Bell. There was no competition to drive innovation or different systems. It wasn’t until competition arrived (Apple, BlackBerry, Nokia, etc) that our modern phones developed.

And I see it differently in that the named competition you mention above were not around when the innovations I mentioned were made - in spite of the monopoly.

Well, Nokia was around, but they only got into the telecom business in the mid '80s and mobile cell phones in '87

The first mobile phone was the Motorola in '73. The earliest commercialized fax over phone line dates back to '64. Modems over phone line dates back to the '20s. A version was developed by Bell Labs (AT&T) and started selling them to the public in '62. The more modern PC modem (remember the Hayes Modems of the 80s and 90s?) was developed by a couple of hardware guys for the Apple II in '77 and for the PC in '81.

All that innovation before AT&T was broken up in '84. That standardized connection didn't seem to stifle anything.

Look, my point is more about how trying to standardize a simple connector is so irrelevant to any idea of holding back innovation. To me, standardizing interconnectivity with all kinds of devices actually drives innovation. Locking down a device by one manufacturer so that you can only buy specific accessories, effectively sanctioned by that manufacturer through licensing fees, actually is the innovation killer. So, basically, what the EU suggests would actually open up a few things. But Apple doesn't want that. They want to keep things (the money) to themselves. And I'm all for sticking it to Apple. I don't care if it's a Government that's doing it. If it makes it better for more people and frees up innovation, great.

 

[mustang7757]

All good points but those were different times. There was a monopoly over the telephone industry for almost 100 years: Bell. There was no competition to drive innovation or different systems. It wasn’t until competition arrived (Apple, BlackBerry, Nokia, etc) that our modern phones developed.

And I see it differently in that the named competition you mention above were not around when the innovations I mentioned were made - in spite of the monopoly.

Well, Nokia was around, but they only got into the telecom business in the mid '80s and mobile cell phones in '87

The first mobile phone was the Motorola in '73. The earliest commercialized fax over phone line dates back to '64. Modems over phone line dates back to the '20s. A version was developed by Bell Labs (AT&T) and started selling them to the public in '62. The more modern PC modem (remember the Hayes Modems of the 80s and 90s?) was developed by a couple of hardware guys for the Apple II in '77 and for the PC in '81.

All that innovation before AT&T was broken up in '84. That standardized connection didn't seem to stifle anything.

Look, my point is more about how trying to standardize a simple connector is so irrelevant to any idea of holding back innovation. To me, standardizing interconnectivity with all kinds of devices actually drives innovation. Locking down a device by one manufacturer so that you can only buy specific accessories, effectively sanctioned by that manufacturer through licensing fees, actually is the innovation killer. So, basically, what the EU suggests would actually open up a few things. But Apple doesn't want that. They want to keep things (the money) to themselves. And I'm all for sticking it to Apple. I don't care if it's a Government that's doing it. If it makes it better for more people and frees up innovation, great.

You guys both bring up good points

 

[J Dubbs]

And I see it differently in that the named competition you mention above were not around when the innovations I mentioned were made - in spite of the monopoly.

Well, Nokia was around, but they only got into the telecom business in the mid '80s and mobile cell phones in '87

The first mobile phone was the Motorola in '73. The earliest commercialized fax over phone line dates back to '64. Modems over phone line dates back to the '20s. A version was developed by Bell Labs (AT&T) and started selling them to the public in '62. The more modern PC modem (remember the Hayes Modems of the 80s and 90s?) was developed by a couple of hardware guys for the Apple II in '77 and for the PC in '81.

All that innovation before AT&T was broken up in '84. That standardized connection didn't seem to stifle anything.

Look, my point is more about how trying to standardize a simple connector is so irrelevant to any idea of holding back innovation. To me, standardizing interconnectivity with all kinds of devices actually drives innovation. Locking down a device by one manufacturer so that you can only buy specific accessories, effectively sanctioned by that manufacturer through licensing fees, actually is the innovation killer. So, basically, what the EU suggests would actually open up a few things. But Apple doesn't want that. They want to keep things (the money) to themselves. And I'm all for sticking it to Apple. I don't care if it's a Government that's doing it. If it makes it better for more people and frees up innovation, great.

I'm all for anything that stifles some of Apple's severely anti-consumer obscene greed

 

[spARTacus]

...but if this standardization/regulation of phone chargers gets traction all over the world, from the perspective of government being able to successfully put their fingers into things, what might be next? Gun control?

Just in case someone is wondering, yes this is a sarcastic post.

 

[Chuck Finley69]

...but if this standardization/regulation of phone chargers gets traction all over the world, from the perspective of government being able to successfully put their fingers into things, what might be next? Gun control?

Just in case someone is wondering, yes this is a sarcastic post.

Thankfully, I live in the safety of the USA still….

 

[Mike Dee]

USB C is basically similar to a female Lightning connector.

 

[Chuck Finley69]

USB C is basically similar to a female Lightning connector.

But I thought EU supported all gender identities, of connectors.

 

[Kizzy Catwoman]

This is simply government overreach. Let the markets decide what they want.

The EU flexing again. Why I voted Brexit.