Suck it micro USB, mini USB, and lightning! 🪫🔋

  • bamboo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    12 days ago

    You should verify this, but I think there is like a consortium of sorts made up of tech companies that pick a standard that they all must follow. So in the future, it’s possible for them to pick a new standard, and then after a transition period everything would be required to switch (though of course you could still continue using old devices, they just can no longer be sold new).

    • iii@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      What happens if the better technology is invented by a company not part of that chosen tech club? They get to block it’s adoption?

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        12 days ago

        If it’s really that much better, it’ll be used for other things and catch on, then they’ll be a part of the group.

        • iii@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          12 days ago

          How can it be used for other things, if this law makes that illegal?

          • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            12 days ago

            The new law allows you to have more than one charging connector provided that either the USB-C one is the best one, or the USB-C one is as good as the spec allows. If the new connector’s genuinely better, then it’ll beat a maxed-out USB-C connector, so devices will provide it in addition to a maxed-out USB-C connector.

            • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              edit-2
              12 days ago

              uh huh and when the company is sued into oblivion proving their tech is better then what? the problem with laws like this (and I generally support it) is that they give bad actors ways to club others to stifle competition.

              • Laurel Raven@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                12 days ago

                Sued for following the law and making sure the required connector is present and functional? Unless I’m missing something, the law doesn’t require the port be exclusive. I mean, if it did, they’d have to stop including wireless charging, and I don’t see that happening.

                • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  12 days ago

                  Yes, its additional cost which acts as a moat by increasing development costs. now you need to design your new connector and make sure its compatible with the existing standard.

                  If I’m a company who builds widgets and this new startup will have a better design you damn well bet i’m going to sue them to increase costs and decrease the likely hood they’ll succeed.

                  • bamboo@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    12 days ago

                    And it would be tossed out for lack of standing before any arguments are heard or considered.

          • catloaf@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            12 days ago

            It doesn’t. It only applies to “smartphones, tablets and cameras”, according to the article.