Comment by cherrycherry98 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by cherrycherry98 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Ports types have been converging naturally without government intervention. Even for iPhones, the writing is on the wall for the the lightning connector. It was introduced nearly 10 years ago under different market conditions (no equivalent USB standard existed). Apple is gradually converging on USB-C, MacBooks contain only USB-C ports, the iPad Pro uses USB-C instead of lightning. The rest of the product line can't be far behind given their propensity for simplicity, being able to use one cable for everything fits well with that.

To answer the EU Commission's question, "Are your chargers piling up in a drawer?". No, I have far less chargers than 10 or 15 years ago when my laptop, digital camera, game system, and phone all had different connectors. Now my laptop, game system (Switch), and phone all use USB-C (phone has absorbed the digital camera). My Kindle is microUSB but newer ones are USB-C as well.

I think you greatly underestimate how much of this "natural convergence" happened because of EU influence. See the memorandum of understanding of 2009.

https://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/electrical-engineering/r...

An MoU is not legislation, it's agreement to work together on a common goal. It can be helpful but isn't binding. From the MoU:

"The Signatories retain the right to withdraw from this MoU at any time with immediate effect."

I was demonstrating convergence on USB-C across digital devices. An MoU from 2009 of phone manufacturers agreeing to use microUSB can only partially explain that. Maybe it helped give the idea of USB charging additional momentum. Maybe it would have happened anyway as microUSB was only itself introduced in 2007, and the phone landscape was transitioning to smart phones at this time.

They have been converging way too slowly, and wouldn't have converged as close to one standard without an intervention.

> Ports types have been converging naturally without government intervention.

Agreed, so why bother with government intervention? The benefit is small and the potential long-term costs associated with retarding technological development are high.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com