Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hyundai’s future EVs will also have Tesla’s EV charging port

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 29 posts

Re: Hyundai’s future EVs will also have Tesla’s EV charging port

#11

Post by signatoremo »

cma wrote: post #8
xedrac wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way this would constitute a "blocker" is if they actively prevented every one else from using the same connector due to patents etc... I don't know whether that was the case, but simply "not wanting to change their connector" doesn't mean they are blocking progress. They were the first to roll out massive charging infrastructure. I would say it was silly of the other manufacturers to not standardize on what…

Their patent sharing terms say that they get rights beyond patents or copyright: if you use their patents you agree not to copy any of their "designs," a vague term that no one can really be sure of how expansive it is.

Huh? If it’s vague then no way the patents can be enforced. Tesla’s competitors are both cash rich and litigation happy themselves

Re: Hyundai’s future EVs will also have Tesla’s EV charging port

#12

Post by Volundr »

Tagbert wrote: post #10
chii wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would say it was silly of the other manufacturers to not standardize on what was already there. it seems silly right now, but letting your competitor own a platform for which your business depends is folly, unless there's regulation on that platform.

That is why Tesla has handed NACS to SAE to formalize it as an independent standard free from encumbrance.

Now. This only happened in November.

Re: Hyundai’s future EVs will also have Tesla’s EV charging port

#13

Post by londons_explore »

tegmark wrote: post #2

it was so annoying to suffer the fools who loudly complained about tesla roadblocking a universal charger while ignoring the fact that NACS was way better than the alternatives

NACS still requires the CCS signalling and protocols. They are slow and unreliable.

For example, if your car has the wrong date and time set, then the TLS connection won't establish and you won't be able to charge.

Re: Hyundai’s future EVs will also have Tesla’s EV charging port

#16

Post by screamingninja »

londons_explore wrote: post #13
tegmark wrote: post #2

it was so annoying to suffer the fools who loudly complained about tesla roadblocking a universal charger while ignoring the fact that NACS was way better than the alternatives

NACS still requires the CCS signalling and protocols. They are slow and unreliable. For example, if your car has the wrong date and time set, then the TLS connection won't establish and you won't be able to charge.

Would be nice if they start including GPS in these cars to get accurate time

Re: Hyundai’s future EVs will also have Tesla’s EV charging port

#17

Post by theothershoe »

tegmark wrote: post #2

it was so annoying to suffer the fools who loudly complained about tesla roadblocking a universal charger while ignoring the fact that NACS was way better than the alternatives

Tesla's charger was proprietary so other manufacturers couldn't use it. Meanwhile CCS is an open standard that anyone can use.

What's changed is that last year Tesla decided to publish an open standard. Now that other manufacturers can use the plug, they gave agreed to use Tesla's physical plug design, but with the CCS signaling protocol.

So NACS going forward is more of a new hybrid of the two rather than a switch to Tesla's existing charger. One of the outcomes is that cars equipped with CCS will be able to use NACS with a simple adapter.

Why not use Tesla's signaling protocol? I don't know the details. Maybe Tesla isn't ready or able to create an open standard for that part. Or maybe other manufacturers want to keep the signalling they have to keep adapters simple. In any case only one vehicle and charging station manufacturer (Tesla) will have to make updates on the software side, and to people who don't know the difference between the plug and the software it'll look like Tesla won the charger war.

Re: Hyundai’s future EVs will also have Tesla’s EV charging port

#18

Post by inemesitaffia »

theothershoe wrote: post #17
tegmark wrote: post #2

it was so annoying to suffer the fools who loudly complained about tesla roadblocking a universal charger while ignoring the fact that NACS was way better than the alternatives

Tesla's charger was proprietary so other manufacturers couldn't use it. Meanwhile CCS is an open standard that anyone can use. What's changed is that last year Tesla decided to publish an open standard. Now that other manufacturers can use the plug, they gave agreed to use Tesla's physical plug design, but with the CCS signaling protocol. So NACS going forward is more of a new hybrid of the two rather than a switch t…

The signalling is similar to Chademo which is CANBUS. CCS is PLC

Re: Hyundai’s future EVs will also have Tesla’s EV charging port

#19

Post by inemesitaffia »

Volundr wrote: post #12
Tagbert wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is why Tesla has handed NACS to SAE to formalize it as an independent standard free from encumbrance.

Now. This only happened in November.

June actually. This year

Re: Hyundai’s future EVs will also have Tesla’s EV charging port

#20

Post by rtpg »

xedrac wrote: post #7
rtpg wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Let's have a universal connector" "The biggest EV manufacturer does not want to change their connector" "OK so let's use theirs" "..." This is why we talk about blockers

The only way this would constitute a "blocker" is if they actively prevented every one else from using the same connector due to patents etc... I don't know whether that was the case, but simply "not wanting to change their connector" doesn't mean they are blocking progress. They were the first to roll out massive charging infrastructure. I would say it was silly of the other manufacturers to not standardize on what…

> The only way this would constitute a "blocker" is if they actively prevented every one else from using the same connector due to patents etc..

I'm pretty sure that was the case up until recently, hence the whole hubub

Post reply on HN