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
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.
One of my sources is, https://www.cnet.com/home/tesla-superchargers-will-soon-work...
AFAICT "NACS" is a new thing as of November 2022. Maybe it's basically a renaming of Tesla's existing thing. But the shift to NACS includes important details around published specs and interoperability.
"The biggest EV manufacturer does not want to change their connector"
"OK so let's use theirs"
"..."
This is why we talk about blockers
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.
I'm pretty sure that was the case up until recently, hence the whole hubub
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.
Effectively, that means if your car manufacturer goes bankrupt, you lose charging ability 90 days later. Same if you only charge in places without internet connectivity.