917
Saudi Arabia mandates all electronic devices to use USB-C charging ports from 2025
(www.gsmarena.com)
this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023
917 points (97.2% liked)
Technology
59733 readers
3299 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem with these types of mandates is it locks us into standards and makes change hard. Imagine if they had done this when the terrible USB port was dominant.
Or, it gives all the power to the USB group. They have a terrible track record (USB-C is a mess).
The other problem is all the cheap devices that have a USB-C port, but will not charge from a real USB-C to USB-C cable. They are the same old USB ports electrically with a new shape.
These are bad laws with good intents.
Standards can be updated. Like the EU standard was from Micro-USB to USB-C. It happens all the time in all fields of technology.
How quickly will a standard be updated if the mandate encourages companies to entrench on the current standard? Industries built around the legislative certainty of the current standard may exert influence to inhibit moves to new standards, even if there are good reasons to move on.
What if we had mandated, by law, that all monitors must use the VGA connector in 1995? Would that have made DVI or HDMI or later technologies less likely to take off?
Suppose a company sees an opportunity for a better standard with such a law in place. They would have to develop the new standard and create the market for the new standard, all while their change is forbidden by law. How can they propose a new standard before actually developing it? Then, after sinking the costs on a hope, they would have to pay more to fight to change the law to encompass the new standard against everyone who likes it the way it is.
Don’t get me wrong. It would be neat if every doodad I had used the same connector. But soon enough, any connector we care to choose is a straitjacket. We raise the standard for improvement from being incremental and iterative to no change short of world shaking all at one go.
It's locking nobody with no standard. The standard is evolving time to time. This argument of locking the user which by the way is the same as "competition is the better" is the Apple argument to impose it's locked (walled garden) ecosystem.
It's well known strategy to argue in a way that isn't your goal to achieve another one. Apple is a master here. They use this same strategy with the future mandatory easy battery replacement.
I second this. How could anyone argue that regulation is bad for user? Standardization locks user in, what kind of logic is that?
I'm not sure about the SA one, but the EU variant of that law already has this thought through.
It has allowances already for new emerging standards. If USB-D came out, there would be zero law changes required.
always amazed by people who think "well, if we accept USB-C, we will never be able to have any future tech!" as if the regulation hasnt thought of that.
Which clause of the legislation provides for moving on to a new standard, short of new legislation?
That would be clause 9:
"It is also necessary to provide the basis for adaptation to any future scientific and technological progress or market developments, which will be continuously monitored by the Commission
God that last one drives me up a fucking wall. My partner’s laptop refuses to charge with anything except the officially supported power adapter, even though it’s just a USB-C connector. Everything I’ve plugged it into has been rated for the 100W that the laptop needs to charge, but the damned device locks out anything except official chargers under the guise of safety.
That should be illegal.
Nintendo Switch did/does the same
That’s because the Switch’s USB port isn’t actually a USB-C. Their port falls outside of the standard size/dimension specs, because they wanted the Switch to slide smoothly into the dock instead of having a positive click like a standard USB-C should.
This is why using a standard USB-C on your Switch can actually brick the device. Since the port is non-standard, the pins are much easier to accidentally short when plugging a standard USB-C into it. There was a big string of people complaining about bricked devices shortly after the Switch launched, and eventually players just learned to only use the official Switch chargers. But that’s only necessary because Nintendo told the USB-C standard to go fuck itself, and made a port that is almost the same (and will technically accept a standard USB-C port) but does everything slightly differently.
The Switch charger also has a power switching option, since the Switch draws more power when it’s docked than when you plug it in directly. So the power supply is set up to detect whether or not the dock is connected, so it can supply more power.
Unlike pretty much all other standards, all USB documents are open access and allow you to build compliant devices without 3rd party permission. You only need a license if you want to sell devices with the logo and/or need a official Vendor and Product ID (VID/PID). So unless all manufactures are forced to publish documentation for their IO in a similar level of detail, forcing one standard upon everyone is the next best option. Apple gambled on keeping their connector proprietary, and now get the backlash they deserve.