Recommended Posts

As long as we get an excellent and superbly long-term standard, I'll be okay with it. But it could kill innovation in this area. 

 

Apple did one up on everyone with its newest port. 

 

 

But what this would really help is the environment, I guess. We wouldn't need a new charger with every phone. 


And this would definitely have serious global implications. EU is no small market. 

How does one innovate on these connectors now?  Does it have to become a new standard?

Companies are free to come up with a new standard that, if accepted, will roll out. For now, we have Micro-USB as standaard, but we might move to USB 3.1 type-c by 2017.

  • Like 1

Companies are free to come up with a new standard that, if accepted, will roll out. For now, we have Micro-USB as standaard, but we might move to USB 3.1 type-c by 2017.

 

So one company has to put a lot of money into R&D (and know, that it is a lot of money) and then if they want to incorporate it into their device in the EU they're forced to make it and the patents available to all other OEMs?  Free of charge or FRAND?  

 

If it's free then there's no incentive for the first company to invest money.  If it's FRAND, then there's no incentive for other OEMs to spend more. 

 

Am I missing something?  I'm not saying that it's not a good thing to have a common charging port and accessories between devices - it is a really good thing.  BUT, eventually something new will be required and who's going to invest money into that if there's no return?  Is there going to be a new ubur entity that all OEMs contribute money towards to develop the next standard?

So one company has to put a lot of money into R&D (and know, that it is a lot of money) and then if they want to incorporate it into their device in the EU they're forced to make it and the patents available to all other OEMs?  Free of charge or FRAND?  

 

If it's free then there's no incentive for the first company to invest money.  If it's FRAND, then there's no incentive for other OEMs to spend more. 

 

Am I missing something?  I'm not saying that it's not a good thing to have a common charging port and accessories between devices - it is a really good thing.  BUT, eventually something new will be required and who's going to invest money into that if there's no return?  Is there going to be a new ubur entity that all OEMs contribute money towards to develop the next standard?

 

I don't see why companies could not add extra pins to their connectors to do whatever other stuff they want and keep that R&D for themselves.

 

The point is that you should be able to charge every phone with the same charger, not that you can't require different non-standard cables for other stuff besides charging (eg. syncing).

So one company has to put a lot of money into R&D (and know, that it is a lot of money) and then if they want to incorporate it into their device in the EU they're forced to make it and the patents available to all other OEMs?  Free of charge or FRAND?  

 

If it's free then there's no incentive for the first company to invest money.  If it's FRAND, then there's no incentive for other OEMs to spend more. 

 

Am I missing something?  I'm not saying that it's not a good thing to have a common charging port and accessories between devices - it is a really good thing.  BUT, eventually something new will be required and who's going to invest money into that if there's no return?  Is there going to be a new ubur entity that all OEMs contribute money towards to develop the next standard?

the incentive is that the new connector can be plugged in either way, it is physically sturdier, it is compliant with usb 3.1 so speeds are really fast and it can deliver more current. It will be a great standard that all manufacturers will want.

I don't really care what gets standardized as long as something gets standardized. Micro-USB is fine with me, especially since some places I go to now just leave micro-USB cords hard-wired into the walls for the purpose of being able to charge your phone while out.

  • Like 1

Makes it easier to just use any charger nearby now, as someone always ends up using mine when they misplace theirs in my house

 

Yeah, 3/4 of people at my workplace now have either Android or Windows Phone, which use the Micro USB standard so charger sharing is easier now. Although since getting a Note 3 with its Micro-USB 3 cable, I'm special now because only my note 3 works on that charger, it fits into nobodies phone. Even the iPhone users can share with each other. But I'm a special snowflake, the upside to my selfishness is I can still use everyone elses charger because Micro-USB 2 still fits into a Micro-USB 3 port.

 

1382374076.jpg

  • Like 1

i would not be surprised if all mobile makers would have to comply with apples lightning port.

I would, as good as apple may or may not be, they're not the first, nor are they the only smartphone manufacturer, cost is another factor, (and I doubt all manufacturers would be willing to pay apple royalties)

(it's almost like bringing out a new mains plug, <although not as dramatic> the existing ecosystem is too well established)

To be honest, it would of been better if they forced all mobiles to use the lightning connector. Since I feel it's better in terms of that it is reversible and doesn't have that tongue inside the port that can be broken/collect dust that is a pain to get out again. However, it'll never happen because Apple generally do not share. They patent the hell out of things and sue anyone who even thinks about using them (bleating that it's stealing the hard work of their engineers/designers). This ruling will annoy Samsung though, they are moving to micro USB 3 ports on their devices and this will force them to ditch it and go back to micro USB 2 again :/

To be honest, it would of been better if they forced all mobiles to use the lightning connector. Since I feel it's better in terms of that it is reversible and doesn't have that tongue inside the port that can be broken/collect dust that is a pain to get out again. However, it'll never happen because Apple generally do not share. They patent the hell out of things and sue anyone who even thinks about using them (bleating that it's stealing the hard work of their engineers/designers). This ruling will annoy Samsung though, they are moving to micro USB 3 ports on their devices and this will force them to ditch it and go back to micro USB 2 again :/

 

Isn't it technically the same standard, just the next version of it? It's backwards compatible, just not forwards. Note users can use everyone elses charger cable but not the other way around. Maybe other phones will make the jump to USB 3.

To be honest, it would of been better if they forced all mobiles to use the lightning connector. Since I feel it's better in terms of that it is reversible and doesn't have that tongue inside the port that can be broken/collect dust that is a pain to get out again. However, it'll never happen because Apple generally do not share. They patent the hell out of things and sue anything who even thinks about using them (bleating that it's stealing the hard work of their engineers/designers). This ruling will annoy Samsung though, they are moving to micro USB 3 ports on their devices and this will force them to ditch it and go back to micro USB 2 again :/

Ok, and that's fair, but you mention the inner 'tongue' can be broken? I didn't think that was possible, (but that's only speaking from personal experience as I still have old chargers and even with the abuse they've received, I've never broken one)

Now if this does happen, and a lot, then I can see why switching to any (including apple's) 'regulation' port would be a good idea

Isn't it technically the same standard, just the next version of it? It's backwards compatible, just not forwards. Note users can use everyone elses charger cable but not the other way around. Maybe other phones will make the jump to USB 3.

 

Yes, technically they are the same and I actually forgot you can use a USB 2 cable with it  :pinch:. So if companies migrated to USB 3 and dropped USB 2 that aspect would be a moot point.

 

Ok, and that's fair, but you mention the inner 'tongue' can be broken? I didn't think that was possible, (but that's only speaking from personal experience as I still have old chargers and even with the abuse they've received, I've never broken one)

Now if this does happen, and a lot, then I can see why switching to any (including apple's) 'regulation' port would be a good idea

 

I've never broken it but I've come close  :s. My main gripe though is that the port fills up with dust and eventually it'll stop working properly (this has happened to me) and it's a pain in the arse to get the dust out because it all get caught around the tongue bit.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Digisecret 2.1.431 Pro and Wzipse 4.0. Both are encrypted self-extracting archives.
    • Google reshuffles its AI coding team as it struggles to catch Anthropic by Karthik Mudaliar Google is already reorganizing the AI coding “strike team” it created roughly two months ago, as it attempts to find ways to close the gap with Anthropic in one of generative AI’s most commercially important areas. According to The Information, Google DeepMind is expanding the team’s focus to include “midtraining,” rather than concentrating only on coding tools and agents. Midtraining takes place after a model’s broad initial training but before the final stages that prepare it to follow instructions and perform specific tasks. In simple terms, it gives developers another opportunity to expose a model to carefully selected data before it is polished for release. That could help Google improve Gemini’s underlying coding abilities instead of relying only on better prompts, interfaces, or post-training. Previous research has found that midtraining can be particularly effective for code and mathematics, where models must move from general language knowledge to more structured tasks. Google reportedly created the original strike team in April. It was led by Google DeepMind research engineer Sebastian Borgeaud, who previously worked on model pretraining, and focused on complex, long-running programming jobs. Google co-founder Sergey Brin and Google DeepMind chief technology officer Koray Kavukcuoglu were also reportedly involved in the effort. DeepMind researchers were said to believe that Anthropic’s coding tools were outperforming Google’s Gemini models, prompting the company to give the project more attention. Anthropic has made coding a central part of its AI strategy through Claude Code and its Claude model family. The company has continued improving that area, with Claude Opus 4.8 offering upgrades for coding and other agentic tasks, along with the now-unavailable Mythos and Fable models. The reshuffle also comes at a time when Google faces increased competition for AI researchers. Gemini co-lead Noam Shazeer recently announced that he was leaving Google for OpenAI, while two other researchers who contributed to Gemini and DeepMind projects are reportedly preparing to join Anthropic. It remains unclear whether the reorganized team will produce a new public Gemini model or developer product. No release date, team size, or specific performance target has been disclosed. Source: The Information
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      413
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      168
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      132
    4. 4
      Xenon
      73
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!