macuserosu

While I am not for this legislative move, I can see why if the industry is moving to a standard anyway.  I am sure anyone that used the pre-smartphone cell phones can explain, each company and often each model of phone could have a different charging cable.

My issue with this is the current draft is to refined and I agree limits innovation.

I would have included these types of alternatives:

1.  Where the device is exclusively charged through a cabled charger, the accepting charging port shall be a USB-C port.

2.  Where the device is exclusively charged through wireless charging, the device shall be able to be charged utilizing the QI protocol.

3.  Where the device has a proprietary charging port, the device shall have the ability to be charged through either of the aforementioned means, in addition to the proprietary port.

4. Notwithstanding the standards and protocols stated within, ………

An important note the author is missing is Apple has released hardware at WWDC most recently when it unveiled the Mac Mini developer’s edition for the AS migration.  It would not be out of line for Apple to carry that tradition forward to new releases if the new design warrants getting the devices into developer’s hands before the general public to have the software optimized for the new chipset.  

22july2013 said:

iOS_Guy80 said:

I don’t understand these countries chastising and calling Apple a monopoly. If some other individual, entity or company can develop a better smart phone I would be more than interested in considering buying it but until then I want the best phone available which is an iPhone. Don’t penalize Apple or me for owning an iPhone.

I truly look forward to Apple pulling either their App Store or their phones from a jurisdiction. I wonder how removing one major smartphone company from the marketplace eliminates the "monopoly" problem.

The problem is if they do that, it likely would bate the belief that they were a monopoly even more.  Apple unfortunately is in a loose loose proposition.

Wow.  There is a lot of debate which is great.  The challenge is like most things, there is not a clear picture of who is right or wrong.  As a boss and as any employee let me point out some obviously missed thoughts as people quickly went to the socialist/capitalist debate.

1. The is nothing wrong with Google’s code of conduct statement.  As a boss I get to dictate policy because I have that power, but a wise boss wants buy in with their team. Similarly I have an open door, where I want discussion and feedback on things.  That is how we change how we do things internally.  Having both hats, I take Google’s current code in that vain.  We want you to do good, be good with other, and when you see something “internally” speak up and let’s “try” to address it.

2. Generally questioning a company’s position on something is great.  Like above most companies want a person that thinks, has passion, and cares.  As this is an external concern, those attributes can appear to show the person cares specifically about the company’s reputation.

3. That general questioning goes downhill fast if you are a person that can’t accept a no, has a hidden or broader agenda, or has a boss that is a dictator.  

Personally I just love the author’s “notched” slide in.  I look forward to seeing how many times people will subconsciously/intentionally reference the notch through word play.