Suck it micro USB, mini USB, and lightning! 🪫🔋

104 points

Now for those swappable batteries

permalink
report
reply
39 points

Including cars.

Drive in, swap non-proprietary batteries with an autoloader, drive out. Done.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Yes and no. No need to hot swap massive EV batteries. Rapid is fast enough. But yes so the EV can be upgraded. The batteries go obsolete quicker than they degrade. So make it so we can swap the batteries and keep the rest running. In fact, just right-to-repair the whole car. In fact, the whole everything!

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Hot Swapping batteries is actually surprisingly good for the life of the battery if done well.

Rapid charging the battery does do permenant damage over time especially if you fast charge every time. Whereas if you can hot swap a battery and have a suitable stockpile of them you can trickle charge the battery over a couple of hours instead of 30 mins and prolong the overall lifespan of the battery. Even slowing down the charge rate to 1 hour reduces wear on the battery significantly. Plus, without time pressure from a customer, more time could be taken to replace damaged cells or blocks in a battery so that one pack will more effectively use the whole battery up instead of throwing away perfectly good cells.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

In fact, just right-to-repair the whole car. In fact, the whole everything!

Boy, that escalated quickly

But yes, please.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The batteries don’t live in isolation. There are other pieces that are dependent, whether for basic function or for calibration.

Example: Chevy issued a recall for mislabeling some Bolts as N2.1 vs N2.2. The fix is a sharpie to fix the label, and “reprogramming the Hybrid Powertrain Control Module 2”. I could find no information on either of these chemistries. Dropping in a LiFePO4 would require at least the same, and possibly more.

Now, if you’re suggesting simply swapping a matching replacement part (obsolete as it might be), then I’m on board with that

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Battery swapping is common practice in China. Far as I know, these swaps aren’t for huge capacity batteries, and moreso designed for smaller ones. Takes about as long as filling a sedan tank with fuel. We could have this technology, but there’s not really a push for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

This sounds great until you’ve had to repair an old car.

Everything rusts, warps, etc. The same things that make it hard to change your brakes will make it hard to change the battery pack, and you’re expecting a robot to do it for you (and fast!).

There were companies built on this idea. I think they’ve all gone under at this point.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

The things that seize do so because they are infrequently operated/removed so I don’t see that being the main issue with this.

It still ain’t happening any time soon though…

Aside from not having to charge I think the biggest benefit to this would be charging the packs off peak to even out grid load, or when there is excess solar etc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
*

That is something that I wish would come true. This would also open EVs to the industry in some new ways. Currently it kinda sucks if you have machines that have to be able to run the whole day without big interruptions. When you’re able to just swap the batteries in like 5 Minutes this machines don’t have to rely on fossil fuels that much and are open to be replaced by electric ones.

What I’m thinking about are machines like tractors for farming. During the summer it happens that they are running for 8+ hours without interruptions. Building a battery this big will be quite challengening. However, if you’re able to swap out the batteries after like 2 hours and then continue with work you effectively solved one of the biggest problems with not that much of a hassle.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I think another challenge for farming equipment would also be the uneven terrain, risk of things coming up and piercing or shorting the battery, and also overheating. The first one can be fixed by installing a metal plate like Tesla did after cars kept blowing up. The overheating part might be a bit more tricky. I suppose an air conditioner dedicated to the battery would work alright.

The other thing is, using it day in and day out, from sunrise til sunset or even later, will probably wreak havoc on the battery health. I know EVs in general suffer from this, too, but I feel like it’s even worse for farming equipment, because you know they’ll get a let of extreme use, whereas a lot of people with EVs might only use it for a commute into the city, or a trip to the shops

One final thing, just based off the farmers I know (used to live in the country), a lot of them, maybe even the vast majority, have no interest in upgrading until they have to. If it works, it works. Anything new might not work as well, and require precious time to learn how to use well or properly. They tend to skew towards the older generation, and emissions just aren’t really a concern. Since EV fires tend to make the news a lot of the time, if they’ve got a perception that getting an electric tractor might cause a bushfire and burn their entire farm down, even if that’s very unlikely, and maybe even more likely with a diesel, I don’t think you’ll find them very willing

(This is specifically in regards to Australian farmers I’ve known, perhaps farms elsewhere are smaller, or farmers elsewhere a bit more willing to take upgrades)

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

One of the benefits of EVs is we can get rid of a lot of infrastructure. Everywhere already has electrical so home and destination chargers are a minor add on and it’s only superchargers that are new infrastructure. Meanwhile the entire gasoline and oil refining, distribution, and tens of thousands of gas stations can just go away, along with their associated pollution.

Swappable batteries may sound cool but they’re less edficient plus now we have to build up a huge new set of infrastructure agai, we have to standardize batteries, and we can’t build them into structural parts. The only real advantage is speed but that’s not much advantage if you need to drive somewhere. I’ve never had to charge more than 25 minutes at a supercharger, so swapping a battery is only convenient if it’s at most ten minutes more away. Then you’re also assuming there will be more more battery and charger advances, such as those solid state batteries that a couple vendors claim are already in production, such as 800v charging that a few vehicles already can do, such as the latest Superchsrgers that can charge faster than any car can accept so far, or the semi chargers that have a few built out.

Long before you could build out a huge new infrastructure for seappable batteries and standardize cars around it, we’ll already have charging improvements that will make seappables irrelevant. You could argue they already are irrelevant in some areas

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

While 25 mins doesn’t sound terrible you have to consider throughput. Long lines, waiting for chargers could become an issue if adoption takes off, and if I ever drove by a set of chargers that was full up and more people waiting that’d probably put me off from buying one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

And range just dropped by half. Going somewhere without a loader? Have fun charging way more often.

Would still be nice for road trips in the civilized world though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

They have gas stations in the middle of nowhere as long as there’s enough people with cars. Not saying swappable battery facilities aren’t more difficult than gas station infrastructure, but range matters a whole lot less when you can swap a battery in under five minutes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

So add infrastructure every town and each 200km (120 miles) on the highway to robotically swap batteries and charge the stored batteries (and so many stored batteries if it’s storing enough for 500 cars an hour

As opposed to building chargers with standard connectors which can charge a car in 15 minutes enough to reach the next charger, 30 minutes to 80% (which is generally the limit in high traffic chargers)

I have seen the cages of propane tanks for barbeques and boggle at the idea of the number of 50 to 100kWh batteries a swap station on a highway would need to store

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It is great until the ownership and business model comes into consideration.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Works fine for reusable bottles here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

That’s actually the next goal

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

And make all power tool batteries compatible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

USA checking in.

Just bought a new USB-C charging beard trimmer on clearance.

Feels good, man.

Thamks if EU helped.

permalink
report
reply
45 points

Thx EU, glad to live here

permalink
report
reply
20 points

Thx EU, I live in the the land of the fee but will benefit from you forcing apple to be compatible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Don’t buy Apple to be compatible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Just don’t buy apple

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Don’t buy Apple to be compatible.

Couldn’t agree more mate

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I don’t but my kids do and I’m forced to maintain their crap at work.

permalink
report
parent
reply
109 points

My only concern with this law, is that what happens when USBC is no longer the best option. Idk how to express what I’m saying but what if USB-G ends up being 1000x as fast. Does this law allow for chargers to evolve and if so, how? I admit I haven’t looked into this but I’ve been wondering about it.

I’m 99% wireless these days so I wouldn’t be surprised if chorded chargers are largely on their way out, but I’m still curious.

permalink
report
reply
325 points

Manufacturers are allowed to add supplementary charging standards on top of USB-C PD, and the commission is required to review the landscape every 5 years to see if a new technology is better than USB-C that should be adopted in the future

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2022.315.01.0030.01.ENG&toc=OJ%3AL%3A2022%3A315%3ATOC

permalink
report
parent
reply
121 points

Awesome! I knew by commenting someone educated would come along. Thank you very much.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

It’s like when I make it rain or snow by washing my vehicle! I’m giving you part of the credit for it being future-focused…

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

And they’re using recommendations from the USB consortium, which is comprised of all the large manufacturers in the world, so it should always be up to date during the review process.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Manufacturers are allowed to add supplementary charging standards on top of USB-C PD

Controversial opinion: I wish this wasn’t the case. So many different proprietary protocols, most of the time you’ll still need a specific adapter, and in some cases even a proprietary cable to utilize the full speed, and nowadays most devices come without the adapter.
And there’s even PPS in the PD spec allowing to request for a specific voltage rather than something in an existing list.

But I do also have some personal grievances here:

  1. Mi TurboCharge - This may be something based on PD, but still being something separate. I don’t know, but I do know it requires more pins than USB-A has. 5 pins. Somewhere I read this is connected to a CC pin in the USB-C connector. But no, they did not use USB-C, they used USB-A, with an extra pin. Only shortly before the phone died I finally figured out why it wasn’t charging as fast as expected - I wasn’t using their proprietary cable.

  2. My current phone’s interference (?) with Qualcomm QC 2.0 - Somehow when using a cable with non-perfect connection on QC-compatible adapters, when I move the USB-A connector, it starts triggering 12V mode until it finally shows overvoltage error and slows down to 7W. QC 2.0 is how my USB tester identifies it. This is a MediaTek-based device, so I don’t think it would support QC. The original adapter uses PD and some 11V 6A thing with unknown protocol. Perhaps that is where the problem originates, I don’t know what data it sends down. But testing with OTG adapter on the original brick it seems the protocol needs the extra pins of USB-C to work properly.

I’ve had 3 phones that supported some fast charging, so far 2 of them made it into a confusing mess. Had they all used just PD it would have been a better experience.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

I agree, but at least requiring USB PD, as it’s written, will at least give you 240 watt USB-C charging if they offer higher than 240 watt charging through a proprietary standard

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

From Annex Ia of directive:

3.2. ensure that any additional charging protocol allows for the full functionality of the USB Power Delivery referred to in point 3.1, irrespective of the charging device used.
permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points
*

USB-C doesn’t have speeds, it’s just a connector type. USB 1, 2, 3-3.2, 4 etc. is the protocol responsible for speed. You can have a USB-C connector with any implementation (except maybe USB 1). It can even do DisplayPort stuff.
So for USB-C to become irrelevant we need to come up with a better connector form factor. Which is unlikely to happen soon. But also, same thing happened with USB-B Micro connector (colloquially called micro USB), it was designated as a standard (but Apple managed to get an exemption) and manufacturers had no issues moving to a better connector, which is USB-C.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

On the downside, you can’t tell what the port supports by just looking at it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I liked the magnetic apple connectors.

I hate Apple though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

You can have both, like MacBooks do

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The original MagSafe is great. I still have it on my laptop.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Very much in favor of the mag induction charging! That should be a standard for wall plugs as well

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I wouldn’t have even known what to google to learn this. Thanks for sharing! I actually love the C form factor I didn’t realize that was kinda what made it C and not what it could do. I appreciate your response.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Wikipedia is a good resource

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

What I don’t understand is what was wrong with mini-USB.

Too thick? Just why do people want a portable computer to be thinner that their wallet, or their notebook, or their damned pen, or that Snickers bar in their pocket which nobody made thinner. Who the hell told them that “miniaturization being the future of tech” has anything to do with the box inside which that tech is mounted being just a bit thinner? I mean, were it thin enough to put computers into printed magazine pages, maybe (I think I’ve read that someone did this, with a computer kinda as powerful as ZX Spectrum). Why do they specifically need it? Not to appear “modern”, but really?

The question is, because for me personally mini-USB was very convenient. It held well, was easy enough to stick the right way (and not ruin it trying to stick it the wrong way).

Now, I guess USB-C is fine if it can do the same and go both ways. I actually like it, except RPi 4 is the only device I have needing it.

It’s just … how can one try so many connector types for one group of standards?..

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

If I were to guess, it would be the additional pins. USB-C PD is capable of decent power transfer while also having enough data transfer capability simultaneously. USB-C docks are a good example, seeing that you can hook up a display, charger, other USB devices, ethernet, etc and have it all go through a single cable and (compact, convenient) connector. The reversibility is an added bonus

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

Mini-USB sucked, big time. Not so bad as micro, but yea it was bad.

The main advantage of C over all previous versions is that it’s reversible, you can’t plug it in wrong. The shape is also… “flat”?, so it’s easier to fit into the socket, mini had that wavy like thing going on.

My data source is my small kid: he’s broken 3 (and counting…) usb-mini micro connectors by tugging the charging PS4 controllers, and he has to ask me to connect the cable to charge them, he’s unable to do it himself yet. With his tablet, 0 usb-c connectors broken and he can plug it in himself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

USB micro (not sure if you’re getting micro confused with mini, but doesn’t really matter) only supported data transfer, not video transfer (like HDMI). Some USB-C ports are data only, but it theoretically supports more than USB micro was ever capable of.

For example you can buy a USB-C to HDMI cable for a few dollars, which could theoretically plug your phone directly into your TV (if your phone supports that). But a USB micro to HDMI cable was called an “MHL adapter” and was expensive and only worked on specific MHL capable phones like this one. It has a separate box that requires its own power cord in order to work, it’s not just a simple cable. USB-C should, in theory, eliminate the need for such a thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

At the risk of sounding like Blizzard, don’t you have a phone? Even my previous phone, Galaxy S8 had USB-C. Or do you have an old iPhone?

Pretty much all electronics that came out in the past 4 years use USB-C. Just an example, here’s a non-exhaustive list of things that I charge with C:

  • MacBook (2020)
  • iPad (2018)
  • Galaxy S10e (2019)
  • Steam Deck (2022)
  • Nintendo Switch (2017)
  • Kindle (2020)

All of these are, on average, at least 4 years old. So I’m pretty sure the average consumer has already switched to primarily USB-C

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

The plug will be the same, bet money. There are already several sorts of USB-C. And think on this, the USB-A has had the same shape for going on 30-years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

This, USB-C is just the connector shape. USB-A is the standard square plug everyone knows, USB-B has several different ends, some more well known than others. The full sized “printer/hub” one, mini-B and micro-B which more people know. USB-A to A cables aren’t common, more akin to an Ethernet crossover cable, so you’re almost always going to see one of the B connectors.

USB-C is just the newest plug design, the actual cable and communication protocols have changed numerous times over the decades. USB-C might have been introduced alongside USB 3.0 and the massive increase in charging and data speeds with the new standard, but they are not exclusive.

The most obvious example is probably the iPhone 15 and 16, both had a USB-C plug, but the devices only supported USB 2.0 protocols.

permalink
report
parent
reply

USB-A to A cables aren’t common

I believe USB A-to-A cables actually violate the USB spec and should not in fact ever exist. They definitely should not exist as a straight-through cable (although obviously they still do in reality) without any active electronics in the middle. Male A plugs are solely for connecting to a host device, and the entire purpose of the spectrum of B plugs in their various guises is specifically to make the other end of the cable that goes into the endpoint device different. The point is that you are not supposed to be able to directly connect two hosts together like that.

A straight through dumb A-to-A cable would connect the +5v pin from the host device directly to the +5v pin on the device on the other end of the cable. If you did this between two host devices (i.e. two computers) it is certainly possible that Bad Things would happen if the designers of both devices did not account for this type of stupidity. The only way one of these can be valid according to the spec is to omit the power pins entirely.

That said, I have a particular flashlight that came with exactly one of these naughty cables: A straight through male USB A-to-A cable with no smarts in it whatsoever. The flashlight charges via a USB-A port which is exceptionally bizarre, and I suspect the reason it does so is because it can also act as a power bank and the manufacturer was too cheap to include a type C or micro B or whatever port for input and a separate type A port for output. But now I’m stuck having to use the moronic cable it came with (which is also only like 14" long) without much hope of ever finding an alternative or replacement…

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

USB-B has several different ends, some more well known than others.

micro-B SuperSpeed is always a good one to surprise people with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I had not thought of this good point.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

There’s only so much power you can put through such a small connector. I could certainly see a high end gaming laptop requiring more than 240W since GPUs keep getting more power hungry. They could increase the voltage a bit, but I doubt they will go much higher.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

There’s already docking stations for laptops that use two USB C connectors for exactly this reason.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Fair point but even though it seems USB-C caps out at 5A, it’s quite possible the voltage could be even higher when higher quality materials are used for the existing connector along with controllers that, say, check the resistance before asking for said higher voltage, thus delivering higher wattage. Also keep in mind that the general trend is efficiency, especially with ARM gaining serious momentum.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

If you bothered to read the article, you’d notice that the charger was chosen by the manufacturers a decade ago in a summons by the European commission. If Apple had complied to do what they agreed to do back then, this law wouldn’t exist. But they got whiny and litigious. So, instead of an at will standardization program, the EU decided to make it mandatory by law, to shut Apple up, and anyone else who wanted to forcibly refuse to comply. The cool thing about European law is that nothing is written in stone. Not even constitutions are considered sacred, unlike in the Americas, and can be changed at any point or amended as long as proper procedures are followed. There’s nothing, ever, preventing the EU from calling another commission of tech companies to choose a new charger, if a better one ever shows up.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I did read the article but didn’t know anything about EU law. Someone else shared an excerpt of the law and kindly explained how it worked. Thanks for your response though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

You should verify this, but I think there is like a consortium of sorts made up of tech companies that pick a standard that they all must follow. So in the future, it’s possible for them to pick a new standard, and then after a transition period everything would be required to switch (though of course you could still continue using old devices, they just can no longer be sold new).

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points
*

What happens if the better technology is invented by a company not part of that chosen tech club? They get to block it’s adoption?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

If it’s really that much better, it’ll be used for other things and catch on, then they’ll be a part of the group.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Law does not forbid having multiple charging ports.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Fair. I only use cables, but my assumption would be that they would adapt to new standards. Which is effectively what this is doing to standardize it, IMO.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

USB-C standardizes only a connector. Thats good since there’s a lot of room to evolve the standard while keeping at least physical compatibility, but also bad because now we’re back to a stiuation where we have things that fit together but maulnot be entirely compatible. I suppose there’s a minimum base and a negotiation process so things should somewhat work plus tend to improve over time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’m 99% wireless these days so I wouldn’t be surprised if chorded chargers are largely on their way out, but I’m still curious.

How fast is the wireless charging these days? I’d be surprised if it’s anywhere near the higher USB PD 3.1 modes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’m not sure. I know I could get a high speed one but tossing my phone on at night and currently it lasts all day most days. Same with my watch.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

USB-C isn’t the best option at all because USB c isn’t USB c. It only standardises the port and connector but there are many different connectors.

https://hackaday.com/2022/12/06/usb-c-introduction-for-hackers/

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

This is an interesting article, but I think that this standardisation is exactly for port being the same, not for pinning specific implementation of the 600+ pages long standard.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Thanks for the article, cool read!

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s crazy, isn’t it? But it’s not a single article… I think there are ten more.

https://hackaday.com/series_of_posts/all-about-usb-c/

permalink
report
parent
reply
-24 points
*

Completely fair to assume that the complete fucking idiots who create these laws have the faintest fucking clue about what they’re doing. Don’t be so sure! This law certainly doesn’t anticipate advancement. And why would it? That would require competent people to have power to legislate, and we already know that’s impossible. Great question!

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

If you don’t know the answer it is of course perfectly acceptable to just not provide one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

I don’t think that will occur, because what’s the point of developing USB-G if you’re not allowed to use it in a product?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Why wouldn’t they be allowed to use it?

Computers have room for multiple ports and is where a new standard would crop up anyway even without the law, just like where USB-C started out.

permalink
report
parent
reply
90 points

Eu once again doing more to improve my life than my own government (tax holiday).

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Canada?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

The very same. I saved a few dollars here and there which I would be more than happy to trade for some decent regulations on the things I buy.

What’s funny is that I still got taxed for the expensive stuff I bought, just not a few take out orders and one toy I bought. Success?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I heard your grocery stores just increased prices to match previous post-tax prices.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.8K

    Posts

  • 158K

    Comments