671–680 of 868 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many phones have you seen with multiple different ports for the exact same purpose: charging?
I can name a few but why does this matter. The point is Apple can work around this for eu market if they want but at the end consumers will win anyway
What happens when there is a better USB-C plug - isn't there a concern that locking into the current standard means in 50 years the EU is still stuck. I imagine we're in uncharted territory given in less then my lifetime USB was invented and has gone through at least 14 iterations e.g. it's been changing very fast. Unfortunately I fear even asking this question probably angers some, but I think it's an interesting qu…
The law explicitly states that it has to be reviewed every couple of years to determine whether USB-C it is still the best choice, or there has been sufficient technological progress to warrant a switch to a newer standard. The fear for a "lock-in" is completely unfounded, as the EU previously quasi-mandated Micro USB and switching to USB-C was no issue whatsoever. Besides, nothing is stopping manufacturers from incl…
If micro-USB was mandated, it would have prevent the use of the Lightning connector that I have quite enjoyed for the last 10 years or so, instead I would be stuck with the IMHO inferior micro-USB.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This EU regulation diminishes the incentive of researching and developing a new technology in this area. This is a fact. And no, innovation usually does not come from a bunch of companies sitting down to cooperate on a new version. First there is individual innovation, then there is consolidation, even if these come with changes from the original.
Case in point: Look at how much innovation Apple managed to squeeze into Lightning after its launch… right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can name a few but why does this matter. The point is Apple can work around this for eu market if they want but at the end consumers will win anyway
I'm a consumer and I lost: I'll have to change all my charging cables with an inferior alternative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give me an example of an EU regulation which prevented an European company invent a technology? I'm familiar with the narrative but I don't know any examples.
By definition, we cannot know the creations and innovations we are missing due to the unintended second-order freezing effects of regulation. This is why we need to be extremely skeptical of regulation and only accept it in truly important and non-trivial cases (unlike a damn charging plug). There is a clear push from European elites for a halt in progress, aiming to maintain a status quo and preserve their existing…
It's kinda hard to believe you seriously believe you might end up living in an Amish village. Perhaps you should visit the US and be surprised at how mediocre a lot of stuff is.
What happens when there is a better USB-C plug - isn't there a concern that locking into the current standard means in 50 years the EU is still stuck. I imagine we're in uncharted territory given in less then my lifetime USB was invented and has gone through at least 14 iterations e.g. it's been changing very fast. Unfortunately I fear even asking this question probably angers some, but I think it's an interesting qu…
The regulations get updated, you aren't stuck on usb-c. What EU wants to avoid is Apple giving "unfair" advantages to their own chargers (which could either come from Apple making better chargers or artificially slowing third party ones) defeating the purpose of having less electronic waste.
The very corruptible EU?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody is insisting the cutting edge technology from 10 years ago is superior to today’s. I’m arguing that whatever company should be free to choose I/O interfaces without supervision.
But you were given specific examples of where your preferred tech falls short of others - examples that you asked for - and you chose to ignore them and switch to a different argument. That's kinda rude.
I guess if the original poster hadn't made the gratuitous comment I would have been more focused on answering their valid comments. This is a good lesson for me to not be trolled and others to not make gratuitous comments. Finally apologizing if someone feels one has been rude.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We had a fkin usb-c with godspeed of data transfer and 120-240W transfer and is universally adopted across different devices and brands and Apple still is using a fkin usb 2 with proprietary connector. There is innovation, Apple decided it's users don't need that to sell them overpriced accessories
Lightning is capable of faster speeds. They just (probably rightly) decided it wasn’t worth the cost to put that in their phones when basically nobody transfers data on their phone using a cable. I believe one iPad had it before they switched to usb-c. Obviously HN readers are the exception.
I'm confused. Either Apple is following the letter of the law or it isn't. I don't know what a "warning" from EU Industry Commissioner Thierry Breton is supposed to mean. Either the law says USB-C charging is required but doesn't say anything about charging speeds, or it does say something about charging speeds. In any case, Apple has a lot of lawyers and presumably they're following the law as written . I would assu…
But even if we're bound to this practicality, it's always about the spirit of the law. We have a principle called "statutory interpretation" which is dedicated to this problem, and administrations/judiciaries are often required to follow the law's original intent. Otherwise, administration and/or judicial branch can perform ad-hoc interpretation of legislation in favor of themselves and this defeats the whole purpose of trias politica.
Apple is not immune to this principle and EU is bound to enforce the original intent of the law. This is also why the supreme courts are one of the most important political entity in virtually every modern countries since they have the final and unobjectionable authority on interpretation of laws by setting judicial precedents. Unless you're going to challenge the whole field of Jurisprudence, it might be better try to understand why they're asking this to Apple and Apple takes it seriously.