Perhaps most of the "real" fans are not too shocked when the rumors that Apple will remove the headphone jack on the iPhone 7 appear around mid-2016. After all, this is the crazy guy. Dare to give up the floppy disk drive on the iMac since 1997, dared to bluntly refuse to support Flash since 2007. Apple's past is overwhelmed by controversial removal decisions - the decision to "finish" one of the connectivity standards. Tens of years of life as headset jack 3.5 is just sooner or later only.
Headset jack is a common connectivity standard. Flash was the standard for video content, interactive web-based games. Floppy disks were the standard used for storing and copying data in the 20th century.
So, what is a standard?
A multi-dimensional conceptYou can hardly define "standards" fully in the technological world. USB-C, 3.5mm headphone jack, QWERTY keyboard layout or Bluetooth 4.0 are standard.
First, a standard can be a set of specifications to create a product. For example, Bluetooth 4.0, GDDR5, screen ratios (4: 3, 16: 9, 21: 9, 18: 9) or USB-C are described in detail to manufacturers. can follow. In this case, the standard is usually controlled by an independent trade organization or government agency: Bluetooth owned by SIG, RAM owned by JDEC ...
Second, a standard can be a design, an idea that many competitors follow. You can say that the standard design of the smartphone is rounded rectangular blocks. When Steve Jobs launches the MacBook Air, Windows rivals are also gearing up to launch ultra-thin laptops that can be inserted into the envelope. No one controls or describes the details of the smartphone's design, nor does anyone have the right to say, "I'm only allowed to make thin laptops that fit into the envelope." As long as these ideas are widespread, you still have the right to call them standards.Obviously, the "technology standard" is a multi-dimensional concept. But all the understandings of the standard imply a mandatory aspect: whether it be an idea or a specification, whether controlled by an independent party or a market ruler, each criterion must There are many companies that follow. The ultimate goal of setting up a new standard is to make specifications, ideas that are widely available.
It is because of this that the "standards" are often used as a particularly devastating weapon in the technological world. In some cases, companies will find ways to clench their ideas. (For example, Steve Jobs wanted Apple to have the idea of a "rectangular block of four" for smartphones.) But in most cases , the author brings extensive knowledge of his ideas.
So, have you ever wondered why some crazy guy spends money and effort developing a standard just to then free this standard for all people can follow To The answer is that, when self replicating standards, the author will build the notion that the rivals behind are all inferior and must "learn" them. Take a look at the case of the MacBook Air.The second meaning is much more important: You can run the standards without having to spend a single fee, but you will have to take control of the standard owner himself.
For example, you could create a cloud that has an API similar to Amazon Web Services so that Amazon customers can migrate from AWS to your cloud. Easily. But corporations want to use two cloud providers in parallel to ensure security - the fact that you copy APIs is unlikely to cause Amazon to lose too much. In return, if one of these giants changed their API design, you would have to change yourself.
What happens if Amazon decides to change APIs at a time when your company is struggling? What would happen if Amazon changed the API in favor of Amazon and harmed you? It is not hard to see why Jeff Bezos's company is so "generous".
The battle of the standardsIt is by the supreme power inherent in each of the "standards" that every technology giant wants to get involved with the standards being shaped. Whenever a technology appears, the corresponding standards will quickly appear so that the giants can seize a piece of the future.
Recent technological history is also flooded with such wars. When the DVD prepares for the "garden," the giants start calculating the choice of Blu-ray or HD-DVD as the benchmark for their gaming consoles, laptops, home theater .... This is a fierce battle by two giants Japan (Sony and Toshiba) behind, involved both Microsoft, Warner Bros and many other names. Ultimately, Sony's Blu-ray won, but at a very high price: the financial burden of the discount programs to attract partners has contributed to Sony's falling into difficulties for many years. Worse yet, Blu-ray has not benefited from the whole world of digital download; Optical disc formats are becoming increasingly eclipsed to make way for networking.
Another fairly recent battle is the wireless charging standard. Leading among the competing standards to become the benchmark for wireless charging, Qi is owned by the WPC alliance with the likes of Samsung, LG, HTC and HP. On the opposite side is the PMA / A4WP (which is due to ... two alliances shake hands) with the support of Energy Star, AT & T, Intel and ... Starbucks. Do not be fooled by the name of a chain of cafes inside a technology alliance: If Starbucks chooses to be the wireless charger of the future, teenage guests will have one more reason to sit here for hours on the go. web.What about today The vast Internet of Things has yet to have a boss, promising a fierce battle for Microsoft's Windows IoT and a lackluster vision from Google (anyway, Google also has Nest). A standard VR / AR platform also
