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

    • Qualcomm takes on NVIDIA with new Dragonfly CPU and AI chips by Pradeep Viswanathan Microsoft, Google, Amazon, AMD, Meta, Apple, OpenAI, and several others have been developing their own chips for AI infrastructure. However, NVIDIA still remains the dominant player in the market. Today, Qualcomm announced a major expansion of its data center infrastructure portfolio to better compete with NVIDIA. The new lineup includes the Qualcomm Dragonfly C1000 CPU, Qualcomm High Bandwidth Compute technology, the Dragonfly AI300 inference accelerator, new connectivity products, and custom silicon solutions. Qualcomm claims that this new lineup improves performance per watt, token throughput, and total cost of ownership for AI data centers. The Dragonfly C1000 is a new data center CPU built with Qualcomm’s custom Oryon cores. This chip will feature more than 250 cores, frequencies above 5GHz, and a chiplet-based design. Qualcomm claims that this new C1000 can deliver more than 2x better performance per watt compared to existing server CPU offerings based on specifications. The Dragonfly C1000 will support PCIe Gen 7 with more than 2TB/s of connectivity, along with CXL, advanced RAS features, and both air and liquid cooling. Qualcomm expects the Dragonfly C1000 to be commercially available in 2028. Additionally, Qualcomm and Meta announced a multi-year, multi-generation agreement under which Qualcomm will supply Dragonfly C1000 data center CPUs for Meta’s next-generation server fleet. Qualcomm also announced High Bandwidth Compute, a new near-memory computing architecture designed to address AI’s memory bandwidth bottleneck. HBC Gen 1 will debut with the Dragonfly AI250, which is expected to sample in mid-2027. The AI250 will deliver 133TB/s per card, an 18x increase in effective memory bandwidth compared to the AI200 with LPDDR5X. The new Dragonfly AI300 with HBC Gen 2 is a rack-level AI inference platform from Qualcomm. Qualcomm claims that the AI300 can deliver 4x to 8x better performance per watt compared to existing GPU-based architectures based on memory bandwidth per watt per card. The Dragonfly AI300 is expected to be available in 2028.
    • IBM reveals sub-1nm chip technology, production expected in another 5 years by Pradeep Viswanathan TSMC is now leading the chip manufacturing industry with its 2nm-class process node called N2. Samsung Foundry also has a 2nm-class process node called SF2. TSMC says N2 entered volume production in Q4 2025. Samsung says SF2 started mass production in 2025. Today, IBM announced the world’s first sub-1-nanometer chip technology, marking another major semiconductor research milestone. The new technology is based on a 0.7nm, or 7-angstrom, node and uses a new transistor architecture called “nanostack.” The new design vertically stacks and staggers nanosheet-based transistors so that more components can fit into the same chip area while also improving performance and power efficiency. IBM claims that this new sub-1nm chip can pack nearly 100 billion transistors onto a chip the size of a fingernail. This offers almost twice the density, up to 50 percent higher performance, or 70 percent better energy efficiency when compared to IBM's 2nm node design announced back in 2021. Also, IBM mentioned that this new architecture can deliver 40 percent SRAM scaling. It is important to consider that this announcement from IBM is a research milestone rather than a near-term process node launch. Back in 2021, IBM unveiled the world’s first 2nm chip design, claiming 50 billion transistors on a fingernail-sized chip and major performance and efficiency gains. Five years later, IBM’s 2nm technology has still not entered mainstream commercial production. That is because IBM is no longer a major commercial chip manufacturer. It sold its chip manufacturing business to GlobalFoundries years ago and has since then focused only on semiconductor research, IP development, and partnerships. To productize its 2-nm chip technology, IBM partnered with Japan’s Rapidus, but it has not resulted in anything shipping at scale. IBM says that its new sub-1nm technology can reach production as early as within the next five years. If that happens, it will likely depend on manufacturing partners, advanced EUV tooling, and years of yield improvements.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Meta Plast earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • 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
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      135
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!