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

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1010 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.

      • AnyOldName3
        link
        fedilink
        English
        810 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          10 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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            410 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.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              110 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.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                110 days ago

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

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  19 days ago

                  standing isnt some mythical unambiguous concept. in fact its almost entirely a legal fiction. times when standing should be granted its not and times when it shouldnt be it is. trying to make an argument that standing invalidates my point is fairly silly, since the very existence of this law has a chilling effect. denying that is foolish.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        410 days ago

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