Take electric tools. If I have a Milwaukee setup (lawn mower,leaf blower etc) and I buy a new drill. If I want to use the batteries I currently have I’ll have to get a Milwaukee drill.
Yes this is good business, but not all industries do this. Why?
In: 562
There comes a point when market volume and interoperability is more valuable than specificity.
Usb-c has reached the point where just about every device can be charged with that port. It has the benefit of universal design across both power and data bandwidth, which means it’s simpler amd cheaper to design for. And because it touches so many tech related areas of personal and business computing across the world, reaching a universal system became almost a requirement.
Apple held out with its iPhone charging port for years to keep people reliant on its ecosystem. But the sheer number of competitors in the smartphone and tablet space using usb-c ports capable of both power and data transfer means it’s a lot simpler to replace a missing charger or cable with an equal yet generic brand. Restricting the iPhone to the lightning port for so long was only possible due to the market share iPhone enjoyed. These days that share has shrunk enough that while it may still be the biggest slice of the pie, it’s no longer more than it’s next two competitors, and they knew the charging port was part of this.
With USB-C becoming the minimum acceptable standard globally, both technologically and in places legislatively, it makes sense that Apple would see it as a cost saving move to go to USB. This gives them back a bit of compatibility with other tech, and saves them money from not having to make lightning chargers any more.
Other industries like power tools simply don’t have the same market size and interoperability requirements as phones and tablet computers.
But you do see it in international industries such as home entertainment (eg DVD and bluray) and medical tech
Latest Answers