Big Backing For 'Universal Stylus' Campaign (bbc.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Big Backing For 'Universal Stylus' Campaign (bbc.com)

Posted by msmash on Wednesday January 31, 2018 @08:41AM from the natural-progression dept.

Google has backed an effort to standardise touch-screen styluses so they can be used on many devices. From a report: The Universal Stylus Initiative (USI) was launched, in 2015, to encourage companies to produce styluses that work on rivals' products Dell, Intel, Lenovo, LG and graphics tablet-maker Wacom have all backed the project. However, Apple, Microsoft and Samsung have not. One expert suggested the big brands would keep their proprietary pens. Styluses designed to work with modern touch-screen devices and graphics tablets usually contain sensors to detect pressure, movement and orientation of the pen.

87 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Another Google story? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 08:46 · Score: 0

Was this before or after they introduced lazy image loading in Chrome and also revolutionized airline delay forecasting? How has Google infiltrated Slashdot?
1. Re:Another Google story? by desdinova+216 · 2018-01-31 09:01 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  and I thought there was an Apple bias?
The nice thing about standards... by Locke2005 · 2018-01-31 08:48 · Score: 1, Flamebait

...is there are so many to choose from. We had a standard connector for charging phones: microUSB. Apple and Samsung chose to go with a proprietary connector instead. The lighting cable is at least available from third parties; the Apple version cost $22 at BestBuy. The Samsung Galaxy S8 and presumably the S9 as well use a proprietary cable, only available from Samsung as far as I know. Apple sells a $99 Apple Pen; what monetary interest could they have in supporting a universal stylus?

--
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
1. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 08:58 · Score: 1
  
  The galaxy S8 uses a USB-C connector and all Samsung smart phones I've dealt with used some standard USB connector.
2. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 08:59 · Score: 1
  
  Galaxy S8 uses USB type C, which is not proprietary
3. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 09:00 · Score: 1
  
  The S8 and S9 use a USB-C cable. It's about as proprietary as a MicroUSB.
4. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 09:01 · Score: 0
  
  you do know that Usb Type-C which the Galaxy S8 uses is a standard right?
5. Re:The nice thing about standards... by DontBeAMoran · 2018-01-31 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  As the others above said, the Galaxy S8 uses a USB-C connector, however I do not recognize it as a standard USB connector since you do not need to try three times to connect it the right way around.
  
  --
  #DeleteFacebook
6. Re:The nice thing about standards... by tlhIngan · 2018-01-31 09:14 · Score: 0
  
  ...is there are so many to choose from. We had a standard connector for charging phones: microUSB. Apple and Samsung chose to go with a proprietary connector instead. The lighting cable is at least available from third parties; the Apple version cost $22 at BestBuy. The Samsung Galaxy S8 and presumably the S9 as well use a proprietary cable, only available from Samsung as far as I know. Apple sells a $99 Apple Pen; what monetary interest could they have in supporting a universal stylus?
  The problem is then you get no innovation. Micro USB sucks in various ways, being a single orientation connector is one of them. Yet, if everyone stuck to the standard, we'd all be ... stuck with the standard.
  Proprietary connectors generally suck, unless they're generally better, like Lightning is compared to micro USB. Like being orientation-independent so it goes in either way. That's a very nice feature to have, and why USB-C is much nicer. But such things don't generally happen on their own unless we have something different to compare them to.
  It's also way too easy to say "micro USB is it, everyone has to use it" and then run into problems when someone better comes along, like things with USB-C now upsetting the cart of "micro USB everywhere".
  Incidentally, the official Apple lightning stuff is waterproof from the get-go (because it's machined and then injection molded) while the third party stuff isn't (two piece sheet metal pressed together). It'z why Apple gets away with using it as a structural element.
7. Re:The nice thing about standards... by dgatwood · 2018-01-31 09:30 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The problem is then you get no innovation. Micro USB sucks in various ways, being a single orientation connector is one of them. Yet, if everyone stuck to the standard, we'd all be ... stuck with the standard.
  Nonsense. If companies decide that the standard isn't good enough, they can improve the standard, just like the USB consortium did with USB-C.
  IMO, if Apple had pushed for improvements to the standard instead of going off on their own with Lightning, we wouldn't have two incompatible standards right now. After all, I think everybody had concluded that micro-USB was fundamentally unreliable by the time Lightning came out, and they were looking for a replacement by that point anyway. The idea of making a reversible connector might have been borrowed from Apple (no idea about the timeline for that decision), but it certainly wasn't the primary driver for replacing micro-USB.
  In fact, if Apple had stuck with the standards and pushed to improve those standards rather than using the 30-pin dock connector way back in the day, there's a good chance we'd have gotten a USB-C-like connector many years earlier, instead of the disaster that micro-USB turned out to be.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
8. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  What made you think Samsung was using a proprietary cable on their phones?
  https://www.samsung.com/us/support/answer/ANS00062655/
  I even gave you a link. GO on, click it and look.
9. Re:The nice thing about standards... by sexconker · 2018-01-31 09:34 · Score: 1, Flamebait
  
  It is absolutely proprietary. USB is not open and free. It's just the proprietary spec most devices use and many devices pony up the $$$ to license. (You can always buy unbranded crap from Amazon and hope it doesn't short out.)
10. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Holi · 2018-01-31 09:34 · Score: 1
  
  What? I have a Galaxy S8 and it uses microUSB and the S9 will use a USB-c (again a standard connector). Not sure why you think Samsung is using a proprietary connector but you should probably verify those things before posting.
  
  --
  Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
11. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Holi · 2018-01-31 09:36 · Score: 1
  
  correction S7 uses microUSB S8 uses USB-c
  
  --
  Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
12. Re: The nice thing about standards... by Type44Q · 2018-01-31 09:42 · Score: 2
  
  as far as I know
  That would be a new unit of measurement based on the number zero? Sounds far indeed...
13. Re: The nice thing about standards... by Type44Q · 2018-01-31 09:43 · Score: 2
  
  You don't know the meaning of "proprietary."
14. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 09:55 · Score: 0
  
  They did use a proprietary connector years ago while many of the other, more generic, brands used micro USB. Doesn't Samsung still use Qualcomm's proprietary quick charge rather than the USB C fast charge?
15. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 10:04 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  It is absolutely proprietary. USB is not open and free.
  Actually it is open, you can download the spec from here. Also it is free of charge, you can pay for a VID ($5000USD) and you can pay to license the logo ($3500USD) but you can also do as many do and if you need a VID use 0xF055.
16. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 10:08 · Score: 0
  
  The problem is then you get no innovation.
  Rubbish, if that were true we would all be using USB 1.0. There's no reason Apple couldn't simply provide the specification for Lightning as the next iteration of USB to everybody and simply collect a license fee for the trademark just like USB but instead they want to keep it as their own proprietary standard.
17. Re:The nice thing about standards... by omnichad · 2018-01-31 10:09 · Score: 1
  
  It's no more proprietary than Micro USB, so the argument is still totally pointless.
18. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 10:10 · Score: 0
  
  The lighting cable is at least available from third parties; the Apple version cost $22 at BestBuy.
  Perhaps I'm playing the useful idiot here, but as far as I'm aware, the unofficial, non-"MFi" versions (as well as fakes) don't include the "load switch" IC that safely filters the raw output from the charger and protects the device from overcurrent, surges, etc.
  Both versions include a "handshake" chip that sets up the charging process, essentially confirming that it's a genuine Lightning cable and that it's safe to let down its defences and pass charging current.
  In the case of the fake cables, this is a lie, because the handshake chip is fake and the cable then passes the *unfiltered* current directly from the power supply to the phone, which is at risk if the output from your USB charger is less than perfect.
  From what I've heard from those who actually repair phones- I'm not directly involved in that myself- 12V car battery to USB chargers are particularly prone to such spikes in the output and *will* eventually damage your phone if you're using a non-MFi cable.
  On the other hand, third party MFi-certified cables (i.e. those which contain Apple's chips but aren't made by them) are often available for not much more than the cheap and nasty crap that's likely to fry your phone- assuming the certification on the box is genuine!
19. Re:The nice thing about standards... by OrangeTide · 2018-01-31 10:18 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  You can use the USB connector freely. You can't put the trademark logo on a device that hasn't paid for the logo license and passed USB-IF compliance testing. It's a nice loophole for hobbyists that want something totally free and off-the-shelf.
  If you're manufacturing devices, it's a single fee without a per device charge. This is different from something like FireWire which was open spec, but the trademarked names and logos cost a $1 per device. (or $1 per port?). FireWire is an open standard (IEEE 1394-1995) but an official copy of the standard is $335.00 for IEEE members (membership is $35/year).
  Really proprietary stuff means you can't even buy the components to build a connector or cable without an agreement from the manufacturer or custom manufacturer.
  But perhaps you have a different definition of proprietary than the rest of us have. If so, please explain it.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
20. Re: The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 10:24 · Score: 0
  
  ...Apple sells a $99 Apple Pen; what monetary interest could they have in supporting a universal stylus?
  I would say that, from my experiences with styli for windows and some others, the rest should just license the Apple system used on the iPad Pro. I am not generally a Apple fan, but credit where credit is due, they got the pen right.
21. Re:The nice thing about standards... by OrangeTide · 2018-01-31 10:28 · Score: 2
  
  was filled with people saying how superior Micro USB was to Lightning.
  Are you sure they were serious? Do you have any examples? Just because one thick headed nitwit on-line debated some stupid position doesn't really follow that /. is filled with such people.
  FireWire/IEEE1394 was better than USB for many technical reasons, especially 800 and S1600. And I believe that dominance lasted for about 10 years. But technical reasons alone don't guarantee adoption. And every year 1394 stagnates we'll see USB moving beyond it.
  The versatility of USB Type-C to carry USB 3, active power (USB-PD), DisplayPort, Thunderbolt 3 and now HDMI is a huge advantage. But USB-C far from simple and in some ways it was designed for chip companies to sell more chips, and that should not be surprising given the USB-IF's membership list.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
22. Re:The nice thing about standards... by LynnwoodRooster · 2018-01-31 10:33 · Score: 2
  
  Micro USB is superior to Lightning. Yes, Lightning and type C can allow you to plug in either way as compared to micro USB. But Lightning is not available on basically anything other than iOS devices. I have to carry an extra, special cable for just that. Or lots of dongles/adapters. Micro USB is ubiquitous, required by law in the EU, low cost, and fairly robust. I can get plugs and jacks for pennies at a dozen suppliers, and cables are everywhere. Lightning? Not so much... I can build cables with multiple connectors on them (type C, micro USB, mini USB, mini HDMI, etc) but Lightning is limited to just Lightning-to-USB C or Lightning-to-Type A only (per Apple's requirements). The flexibility of use, ubiquity, and low cost make micro USB superior to Lightning.
  Now, if you want to rate the ease-of-insertion higher than all that, then great. Go with type C - and then you gain flexibility of use (meaning you can mix and match connectors - and as many as you want - on a given cable), ubiquity, and low cost (relative to Lightning) and be done with it.
  So in what way is Lightning superior to type C? Or, discounting the dual orientation feature, in what way is Lightning superior to micro USB?
  
  --
  Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
23. Re:The nice thing about standards... by ilsaloving · 2018-01-31 10:35 · Score: 1
  
  Be careful with lightning cables. I got a couple of cheaper ones. After a while, _all_ the devices I was using them with could no longer charge properly. I switched to apple branded cables and the problems mostly went away, but not completely. I think the cable might have caused some kind of damage to the power system of said iDevices.
  Never buying 3rd party cables again. Just can't trust them.
24. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 10:56 · Score: 0
  
  Micro USB is awful. So many tiny parts that wear out way too quickly. I've never had a cable last more than a year of daily use, while Lightning cables either fail quickly or last practically forever. One of the main reasons I got an iPhone was so I wouldn't be subjected to Micro USB and all the fiddling it takes to get even a 6 month old cable to charge a phone (forget about car adapters, those self destruct almost immediately from the constant vibration). And then everyone went to Micro USB 3 for external hard drives, so now I have to be really careful with those connectors so they don't all die on me before I can find reliable replacements (never move or even touch a device with a cable plugged in, avoid plugging in and unplugging the cable, just stay away from the whole thing...). Lightning just works.
25. Re:The nice thing about standards... by LynnwoodRooster · 2018-01-31 11:00 · Score: 1
  
  Lightning cables either fail quickly or last practically forever... Lightning just works.
  Except, apparently, when it doesn't?
  And it's much more expensive, not as ubiquitous, and only works on your iOS device. If you have a Macbook, you need to carry extra cables for your iOS devices and your type C ports...
  
  --
  Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
26. Re:The nice thing about standards... by tlhIngan · 2018-01-31 11:48 · Score: 1
  
  Nonsense. If companies decide that the standard isn't good enough, they can improve the standard, just like the USB consortium did with USB-C.
  Yeah, but how are you going to tell if it's better?
  USB-C didn't come out of thin air. And I'm pretty sure there was zero need for it - after all, all the cables had USB 3.0 versions of them.
  You can invent USB-C but then you have to prove it's much better than the existing standard which is well entrenched - you're convincing an entire industry to change to something new and require all new cables and connectors, after all.
  And likely, without the fact that Lightning was around, there would've been zero incentive to even invent USB-C. There aren't many cables that go in either way (maybe the odd power cable but taht's about it). There is a rumor that Apple was the source of the USB-C's design purely because they were fed up of micro USB's limitations - hoping someone would take up what Lightning has done and make a USB equivalent. When that didn't happen, Apple did it and bound together various USB standards no one was using, too (USB-PD existed long before USB-C but was rarely implemented).
  Of course, it's also a reason why USB-C is a bit of a mess, since Apple designed it and gave it away and pretty much defined everything about it so it would fit with their use case of laptops...
27. Re: The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 11:52 · Score: 0
  
  Practically all of my cables that were purchased through oems or cost more that 5 bucks have lasted years.
  My car charger (through various hot and cold cycles in Canada) still works 100 percent and still hangs on to devices if you hold it just by the cable...
  This was purchased with my Nexus one, and i use it daily to keep my phone fully charged. There's a few reversible micro USB cables i bought for 8 bucks. (Each end can be flipped around)
28. Re: The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 11:54 · Score: 0
  
  Samsung used their own ports for a few tablets. They've always provided adapters as far as i recall.
  Everything else from the original Galaxy S phone used standard is cables
29. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 12:20 · Score: 0
  
  Look, everyone, it's sexconker spouting completely made-up horseshit again!
30. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 13:19 · Score: 0
  
  Because lots of companies producing the cables don't follow the specification. Same with chargers. That is why there is a big brouhaha about USB-C cables damaging electronics. Whereas Lighting requires an active cable that contains a chip from Apple that negotiates the connection and transmission of data. The power pins are symmetrical but the data pins are asymmetrical and dynamically assigned based on the use of the device.
31. Re:The nice thing about standards... by connect4 · 2018-01-31 14:32 · Score: 1
  
  LOL
32. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Immerman · 2018-01-31 14:38 · Score: 1
  
  > Micro USB is ubiquitous, required by law in the EU
  Pretty sure the EU just endorsed it as the recommended charging standard, rather than actually requiring it by law. Otherwise iPhones couldn't be sold in the EU.
  That said, having an official EU-wide phone plug recommendation did absolute wonders for the global phone-charger market within months, so gotta give credit where it's due.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
33. Re:The nice thing about standards... by LynnwoodRooster · 2018-01-31 16:14 · Score: 2
  
  No, it's required. Apple gets around it in the EU by shipping a micro USB to Lightning dongle, so the charger can be the legislated standard with a micro USB output.
  
  --
  Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
34. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Immerman · 2018-01-31 16:36 · Score: 1
  
  Wow, I wonder how I missed that.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
35. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 21:35 · Score: 0
  
  USB-C replaced earlier Micro-USB connectors, which were more fragile. I actually kinda like the lightning connector on apple devices, but I also don't care that it has it or not.
  But with the Stylus, there's two essentially broken pieces that can't be resolved.
  Only Wacom uses EMR batteryless pens. These are by far the superior option, and wacom's patents should have all expired by now. Wacom also has AES which is basically nTrig but Wacom. It's in anything sold as a touch screen and tablet.
  Microsoft uses nTrig, which is basically rubbish, it uses the touch screen, and thus can not work with any stylus that isn't capacitive.
  Apple uses an ARM chip and Bluetooth in theirs.
  Samsung's stylus is no different from a WiiU stylus and is basically just a chunk of plastic.
  So there is no way to produce a stylus that can work on all three technologies. At best you will be able to switch to "dumb mode" on the Wacom/nTrig drivers to allow chunks of capacitive plastic to use the capacitive screen without any features, but that's no better than finger painting with the touch screen.
36. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-01 01:13 · Score: 0
  
  They did, and were rejected by the USB governing body.
37. Re:The nice thing about standards... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-01 06:26 · Score: 0
  
  Except, apparently, when it doesn't?
  The cheap junk takes itself out of the equation before you come to rely on it. In my case, it was exactly one cable, which cost $5. Lesson learned.
  
  And it's much more expensive,
  See the comment below about cables that "cost more that 5 bucks." All of my Lightning cables cost between $5 and $10, which would seem to be the exact same price as a reliable Micro USB cable. So, um, no.
  
  not as ubiquitous, and only works on your iOS device.
  I have exactly one device that needs to be plugged into a USB cable on a regular basis. Among the rest, it's a mix of Mini USB, Micro USB, and Micro USB 3, with devices now moving to USB-C. Ubiquity is an illusion.
  
  If you have a Macbook, you need to carry extra cables for your iOS devices and your type C ports...
  My MacBook doesn't have USB-C, so no, I don't. And I would probably get some kind of port replicator if that were the case so I could access all of the legacy ports that were removed. I do have to keep an eye on the Micro USB (external battery pack) and Micro USB 3 (external hard drive) cables though so I can swap them out when they start to go. That's kind of a pain.
38. Re:The nice thing about standards... by dgatwood · 2018-02-01 09:00 · Score: 1
  USB-C didn't come out of thin air. And I'm pretty sure there was zero need for it - after all, all the cables had USB 3.0 versions of them.
  There was definitely a need. Several needs, actually:
  
  A need for a small connector that was less flimsy than micro-USB, which has a bad problem with connectors wearing to the point that they become unreliable.
  A need for more pins to allow better bandwidth.
  A need for more power to make it practical to charge tablets that are getting closer and closer to being full laptops.
  As an added bonus, they made it reversible.
  
  Of course, it's also a reason why USB-C is a bit of a mess, since Apple designed it and gave it away and pretty much defined everything about it so it would fit with their use case of laptops...
  I'm pretty sure that's why the 14V option exists, anyway. :-)
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
39. Re:The nice thing about standards... by dgatwood · 2018-02-01 09:10 · Score: 1
  
  If true (citation needed), the important question to ask is why it was rejected. For example, if they tried to push a connector like Lightning, I can understand why. It's a very Apple-centric design, and has lots of behavior that isn't all that useful for other devices that aren't trying to do unusual tasks like providing non-USB serial lines, analog audio, etc. It also has pins on the outside of the plug, which requires some degree of intelligence on the other end to avoid risk of shorting out and causing real problems. It's really a rather bad design in a number of very objectively measured ways.
  But either way, the idea wasn't rejected, and USB-IF eventually did come up with something that is, IMO, far superior to Lightning.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
yea, about that... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 08:57 · Score: 0

I don't see Apple playing along with that.
1. Re:yea, about that... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 09:03 · Score: 0
  
  Apple has the $99 Apple Pencil... It only works 100% on Apple iPad Pro. I guess it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
2. Re:yea, about that... by Anubis+IV · 2018-01-31 10:27 · Score: 1, Flamebait
  
  Nor do I. After all, what incentive does a leader in a particular category have for giving up their competitive advantage? To my eyes, this push for a standard is an attempt to stem the tide among the crowd that's interested in these sorts of things (among which I am not a member).
  Apple currently provides the best stylus in the consumer tablet space, hands down. The Apple Pencil uses a proprietary Bluetooth chip that pushes its wireless latency to a far lower point than anything else on the market, and it only works with the iPad Pro, which has a 120 Hz refresh rate. Between the low latency and fast refresh, it seem as if you're simply writing on a physical pad of paper. Even as a person who has no interest in styluses, it was shocking how much of a difference those factors made over Wacoms and other products I've tried over the years.
  A quick anecdote: my non-techie wife dabbles in watercoloring and sketching, and after a brief stop by the Apple Store a few months back, she went from being completely ambivalent about the Pencil to being blown away by it. When I told her that it only worked on the newest iPad Pro, she immediately changed her plans for her next tablet. She had been planning to pick up an iPad mini once her current mini got too long in the tooth, but now she plans to get a Pro. I've heard similar anecdotes from a handful of other friends who dabble in art, several of whom have dropped their use of dedicated devices like Wacoms that ostensibly do the same things, simply because the Pencil was so much better than whatever they already had.
  I don't doubt that art professionals have access to better tools, or else tools that address needs the Pencil doesn't address, but at least in the consumer tablet space the Pencil is far and away the best thing available. If someone is interested in an inferior stylus, dumb styluses already work just fine. If someone wants a wireless, pressure-sensitive stylus, why would Apple support a device that is almost certainly worse than what they already have, particularly when what they already have is so compelling to the people interested in it that it's driving sales of more expensive iPads, despite the added cost of the Pro and the obscene $100 price of the Pencil.
3. Re: yea, about that... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 11:57 · Score: 0
  
  Apple fan brings Apple fan wife to Apple store, gets amazed at Apple products.
  Did she ever try out competitors? Nope. People get amazed what things can do when they don't know what others can
  News at 6.
4. Re:yea, about that... by Immerman · 2018-01-31 14:48 · Score: 1
  
  Haven't paid much attention in a long time, but I always thought Wacom was the undisputed leader in the stylus market. No batteries required in the stylus, plenty of special-purpose buttons, incredible fast and high-resolution position tracking, excellent pressure sensitivity, and their pro-level products offer orientation tracking as well for high-fidelity virtual paint brushes and the like (2 axis? 3? I'm not certain.) Of course, I don't know what the power consumption was, it might not have been as suitable for low-power mobile devices.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
5. Re:yea, about that... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-01 03:18 · Score: 0
  
  Haven't paid much attention in a long time, but I always thought Wacom was the undisputed leader in the stylus market.
  They are.
  Have you ever seen the Apple pen thing? It goes beyond "broken by design" and straight to "designed to break".
  The pen needs charging (unlike Wacom), and the charging connector is at the end of the pen, which you then insert into the charging port on the tablet (Can't charge both at the same time unless you have some kind of adapter). Which gives you basically a tablet with an antenna, one that cannot flex at any point.
  One of our customers sent the pens with the tablets we should prepare for them, we dared not even take them out of the boxes, because even by looking at them it was so obvious that we were going to break them.
  And speaking of breaking, when I bought my second wacom digitizer, just for fun I tried breaking the pen of the first one (that required both PS/2 and RS-232, so useless on a new PC). Guess what happened... It was pretty hard to break (no lightning connector to break off), and after it did break, both halves still worked.
6. Re:yea, about that... by laxguy · 2018-02-01 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  Seriously? Surface Pro pen is miles ahead of Apples pen.
I'd think this was a stupid story by xvan · 2018-01-31 09:00 · Score: 1

Until I purchased a Sony DPT-RP1.
It comes with a stylus that imitates "real writing experience", including replaceable tips that wear down like pencils, and brake when falling like fountain pens.
1. Re:I'd think this was a stupid story by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 09:05 · Score: 0
  
  Are you stuck to buying replacements from Sony, in this case? Those other stylus at the electronics or Best Buy stores cannot work with your Sony?
2. Re:I'd think this was a stupid story by edittard · 2018-02-01 00:04 · Score: 1
  
  and brake when falling
  
  They have parachutes?
  
  --
  At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
Universal = least common denominator by rainer_d · 2018-01-31 09:04 · Score: 3, Insightful

The problem with these kinds of standards is that they usually settle on the cheapest, crappiest thing. MicroUSB is the perfect example, exploding/burning/shorting chargers are another one.
Lightning, Thunderbolt and especially USB-C are better examples, with companies behind it that have at least some level of QC.
There's nothing somebody else in China can't manufacture a bit cheaper and a bit crappier and a bit more dangerous for the end-user.

--
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
1. Re:Universal = least common denominator by blindseer · 2018-01-31 11:34 · Score: 1
  
  The problem with standards is that they can be well defined to do one thing well, or be loosely defined and leave people guessing. The problems of cheap products that don't follow the standard, and therefore short out and explode, is rarely the fault of the standard.
  Lightning is, IMHO, a well defined standard as it tells you exactly what it can do. USB is a generally good standard as it's mostly just a general purpose protocol that people can for the most part create devices that "just work". Where I believe USB screwed up is with the alternate modes on the USB-C socket and plug. Had they kept it better defined to things like protocols and power output/requirements then it'd be a far less confusing standard.
  USB-C allows for numerous data protocols, video protocols, power, and recently added audio standard. Why add this new audio standard when (again IMHO) the previous USB audio spec worked just fine? A USB-C port could have any of a number of data protocols on it. Just the USB protocols it could support is confusing, is it 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, or the just announced 3.2? Then there is Thunderbolt and it's handful of variants. For video protocols the USB-C port might do DisplayPort (in various versions), HDMI (also numerous versions), MHL (four versions?), any combination of the above, or none at all.
  There was nothing really wrong with Micro-USB if the spec was followed and employed on an appropriate device. It was limited to 5 watts or so for power, which was fine for phones at the time but improved battery technology and higher expectations from our pocket sized electronics lead manufacturers to push the limits on this, and/or just plain violate the voltage and current limits, which lead to melted cables and devices. Being limited to USB 2.0 speed didn't sit well for long either. Being extended, apparently with the USB standards group blessing, to cover things like video output extended it's life for a while. Micro-USB was a good spec for the time, and would likely still be popular if the USB group kept a better hold on enforcing the standard.
  Micro-USB is one end of the spectrum on how to define a standard, make it well defined and it's limits will be found soon enough. USB-C on the other hand is so poorly defined that it will inevitably confuse users because it tries to pack in so much. Had they supported perhaps a single video standard, like DisplayPort, then that would have eliminated a lot of confusion. Had they required that USB-C ports must support USB 3.0 then that would have avoided a lot of confusion too. But then doing that would reduce flexibility. It would also mean that inexpensive "charge only" cables would be impossible, or come to market anyway without the USB spec supporting it.
  There is a balance that has to be found. If the standard is "tight" then everything that follows the spec will just work. That also means limiting freedom for different capability and price points. If the standard is too "loose" then a lot of things won't work together. But if they do work together then wonderful capability can be enjoyed. It's finding this balance that can keep standards from being adopted among multiple competing companies.
  
  --
  I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
2. Re:Universal = least common denominator by chispito · 2018-01-31 12:11 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The problem with these kinds of standards is that they usually settle on the cheapest, crappiest thing. MicroUSB is the perfect example
  I think by most metrics, micro USB has been a wildly successful standard. What is it the perfect example of?
  
  --
  The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
3. Re:Universal = least common denominator by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 13:11 · Score: 0
  
  That's bullshit and you know it. Shitty 3rd party devices are made by shitty 3rd party companies. Quick, cheap, and good. Pick one.
  Dipshit.
4. Re:Universal = least common denominator by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 17:46 · Score: 0
  
  Quick, cheap, and good. Pick one.
  What happened to "pick two"?
5. Re:Universal = least common denominator by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 18:28 · Score: 1
  
  The problem with these kinds of standards is that they usually settle on the cheapest, crappiest thing. MicroUSB is the perfect example
  I think by most metrics, micro USB has been a wildly successful standard. What is it the perfect example of?
  It's the perfect example of a standard that's run it's course and was overdue for replacement.
  When it came out it was a vast improvement over all the proprietary connectors, and old RS-232 based data cables. It had power and data on one cable, and was standard on most every phone. Early attempts violated the standard, but those didn't last long. Near the end there were attempts to extend it's life with more power (with sometimes disastrous results), wider and faster plugs, and extensions to the spec that redefined existing pins. These extensions included video (MHL was most popular), On-The-Go (so devices could host peripherals), and charge only use. Micro-USB near it's end then reverted to outright violations of the spec to overcome the limits imposed by the standard. That's really what killed it, IMHO. Had people kept to the spec then people would not have lost faith in it so quickly.
  My guess is that the USB people saw this and came up with USB-C to "future proof" their hold on a market they created. People didn't want to completely abandon their investment in USB so some kind of backward compatible spec would inevitably thrive, so long as it addressed the shortcomings seen in micro-USB. USB-C took this "future proof" concept to the point of absurdity by mating the old USB 2.0 with a reversible connector that had a set of high power pins and general purpose high speed data pins. This way it could become what anyone wanted it to be. Which is just a way of saying no one is sure exactly what it is.
  Early USB-C had it's share of poorly constructed cables as people tried to cut corners. Market forces and USB standard enforcement pretty much ended that. What I wonder is if USB-C will live to it's potential, or just be little more than a universal charging port for cell phones. If no one takes advantage of the alternate modes, or too many people are confused by the number of alternate modes, then USB-C will get replaced soon too. Apple seems to be the only one to truly embrace USB-C, and I've seen rumors that they are looking for a replacement connector/port already for Thunderbolt 4.
  Getting back to the stylus question, the reluctance for an adoption of a standard stylus could mean competing ideas on how to define it. Some people might want what micro-USB was, which is narrowly defined and therefore highly compatible at the cost of expected longevity. Others might want something more like USB-C, where there's so many options on how to implement it that no two manufacturers will interpret it the same. Different styluses will work across platforms, with "work" being limited to some small subset of the standard that both just by chance agreed to implement.
6. Re:Universal = least common denominator by mugurel · 2018-01-31 21:38 · Score: 1
  
  The problem with these kinds of standards is that they usually settle on the cheapest, crappiest thing. MicroUSB is the perfect example, exploding/burning/shorting chargers are another one.
  I fully disagree! My chargers have never exploded. I thank the EC on my knees everyday for imposing standardization of power supplies for phones.
7. Re:Universal = least common denominator by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-01 03:07 · Score: 0
  
  Lightning is, IMHO, a well defined standard as it tells you exactly what it can do.
  I don't think "standard" means what you think it means.
  Lightning is an Apple thing, not a standard.
Google..no skin in the game by sit1963nz · 2018-01-31 09:05 · Score: 3, Informative

Google is not a player in this game, and be honest I really doubt they give a damn what gets developed as a "standard" Googles stance has EVERYTHING to do with attacking Apple and Microsoft. From reviews I have read both these companies have good pens/tech and they work very well. This is tech google does not have, so why not force these companies to either share or get labeled as "non-standard" even if that standard is inferior. this "standard" is by companies trying to stay relevant.
1. Re:Google..no skin in the game by duranaki · 2018-01-31 09:12 · Score: 1
  
  No skin in the game? I mean aside from them making their own devices that might want a stylus in the future, they also make an OS deployed on devices from all those partner names listed above. You don't see a point in Google ensuring styluses developed for use on ChromeOS devices can be used with other ChromeOS devices that support a stylus? It's all just "attacking"? Come on.
2. Re:Google..no skin in the game by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 09:38 · Score: 0
  
  their own devices that might want a stylus in the future
  As the OP said, no skin in the game.
  I'm sure Google were primarily motivated by this being a cheap way to oppose what Apple and Microsoft have already achieved with their styluses.
  Google's next move will be buy some (probably non-practicing) entity that has patents for the use of pen-like devices in conjunction with computing devices. That will be followed by briefings/press releases explaining how they need those patents to protect this new 'standard'.
3. Re:Google..no skin in the game by sit1963nz · 2018-01-31 09:40 · Score: 1
  
  Google making devices is such as small % of the market you can call it a rounding error. This is simply an attempt to let the tail wag the dog.
4. Re:Google..no skin in the game by duranaki · 2018-01-31 10:02 · Score: 1
  
  So what, you ignore the entire ChromeOS part of my post? Chromebooks outsold MacBooks last year and ChromeOS has a presence far greater than a rounding error and is also increasing every year. But Google should probably just... what? Encourage everyone but Apple, Microsoft and Samsung to invent their own stylus tech so there can be 50 competing standards? Get all their ChromeOS vendors to license the tech from one of those three companies who each have a reputation for not licensing? Just give up? Develop their own from scratch? Or maybe... I don't know... get all the people who don't have proprietary stylus tech but together make up the vast majority of PC sales to pool their resources so they aren't all left out? I don't know why I'm even explaining, I guess maybe someone else will read this who has an open mind.
5. Re:Google..no skin in the game by sit1963nz · 2018-01-31 11:03 · Score: 1
  
  https://www.businessinsider.co... 2016, over 500 million computers, 8 million chrome books The US market the world market.
6. Re:Google..no skin in the game by stephanruby · 2018-01-31 11:34 · Score: 1
  
  Google is not a player in this game, and be honest I really doubt they give a damn what gets developed as a "standard" Googles stance has EVERYTHING to do with attacking Apple and Microsoft.
  No, Google is trying to prevent fragmentation by trying to reign in Samsung. At this point, it couldn't care less about Apple or Microsoft. HTC is the second player in the Android space which has a pressure sensitive pen. Google already owns HTC (the mobile part). But even before Google purchased HTC, HTC had already adapted its pen API to work with the standard Android API.
  And despite the fact that Samsung is using Wacom technology for its pen technology, Samsung is still insisting that developers use its proprietary pen API. Samsung is doing this because it knows it has the largest market share of pen-enabled devices among Android manufacturers, so it knows that app developers are not going to ignore it in favor of the so-called "standard" one offered by Google.
7. Re:Google..no skin in the game by sit1963nz · 2018-01-31 12:00 · Score: 2
  
  Prevent fragmentation...a bit late for that isn't it ?
  http://www.businessinsider.com...
  
  Oreo (v 8) is on 0.3% of devices vs gingerbread (v 2.3) 20.6%
  
  each successive version has fewer and fewer users, what version 9 going to be called " Android 9 "Who gives a toss"
  
  If this were Windows, over 20% of people would still be running MS-DOS 6.
8. Re:Google..no skin in the game by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 12:32 · Score: 0
  
  Because all devices running older versions magically disappear when newer ones go on sail and new versions of Android don't come out at about triple the frequency of new Windows versions?
9. Re:Google..no skin in the game by stephanruby · 2018-02-01 01:33 · Score: 2
  
  The light blue is Nougat (v 7) 20.6%, NOT Gingerbread.
  Gingerbread (v 2.3) is only 0.6% (it's a slightly different blue). Here, take another look at the original link you referenced.
  And here is a less confusing graph with an even earlier date.
  I'm not blaming you though, the Business Insider purposefully altered the original graph so it would tell the story they wanted to tell. And it took a while to figure it out myself, even though I knew that 20.6% of single-processor phones couldn't possibly be correct.
Hey, who needs competition anyway? by PCM2 · 2018-01-31 09:23 · Score: 2

A few searches leads me to believe that Dell, Lenovo, and LG have all put out devices with Wacom stylus technology. I wonder what this "universal stylus" technology will be based on? I wonder whose patents it will depend on?

--
Breakfast served all day!
1. Re:Hey, who needs competition anyway? by Immerman · 2018-01-31 14:59 · Score: 1
  
  I'm a big fan of Wacom technology; however, even among Wacom-based styluses there's no guarantee of interoperability. I've had three different Wacom tablets (desktop digitizer, old transformable laptop, and modern tablet), and none of the styluses work with the other devices. It's very disappointing, though I wouldn't be surprised if it's due to lowering power requirements for successively more power-sensitive devices.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
2. Re:Hey, who needs competition anyway? by Voyager529 · 2018-01-31 15:15 · Score: 1
  
  A few searches leads me to believe that Dell, Lenovo, and LG have all put out devices with Wacom stylus technology. I wonder what this "universal stylus" technology will be based on? I wonder whose patents it will depend on?
  Notably left out of your list are Fujitsu, who basically owns the tablet market in the medical field, where swivel-tablets with keyboards and Windows 7 still reign supreme, and Samsung, who use Wacom styli in their Galaxy Note series of phones and tablets.
  To answer your question though...Wacom's, hopefully.
  Look, I'm all about having competition, but this strikes me as one of those areas where the need for competition is not nearly as bad as others. Even though Wacom seems to license out to basically-everyone, Microsoft bought out N-Trig, and the Apple pencil is basically in-house. Wacom has its issues, but their seeming willingness to license to basically-everyone and driver stacks available for all the major platform as a result of that licensing seems to make them the natural choice.
  I mean, if Google REALLY wanted to, they could probably buy Wacom in cash and incorporate the patents directly, end of story. However, with the other two major players being owned by direct competitors, I don't see how that's going to play out well. Really, if Google does this, then the sad reality is that we lose the abstraction layer that allows something like Wacom to be cross-platform, and with everyone having their own stylus digitizer technology, it's basically going to be an extension of the vertical market and little else. With all the patent land mines owned by the three of them, it'll be near impossible for a fourth company to rise until they expire.
3. Re:Hey, who needs competition anyway? by Aviation+Pete · 2018-02-01 09:04 · Score: 1
  
  USI is most pushed by Intel.
  
  --
  You know it's time for the next revolution when your rulers' names end with roman numerals.
Only the followers want a standard by Arkham · 2018-01-31 09:32 · Score: 2

Apple and Google have zero incentive to have a standard, so that they can be undercut and effectively cede the market to cheap knock-offs. Pens are never the reason for choosing a platform, but it factors heavily into consumer satisfaction. Having a best-in-class experience is critical to maintaining satisfaction.
Also, I suspect the margin on Apple and Microsoft Pens is quite good.

--
- Vincit qui patitur.
1. Re:Only the followers want a standard by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 10:00 · Score: 0
  
  It also ties the likes of Apple to the release cycle of the open standard devices.
Ob by Hognoxious · 2018-01-31 10:05 · Score: 2

Looks like they're supporting universal run-on sentences too.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
1. Re:Ob by edittard · 2018-02-01 00:12 · Score: 1
  
  Mistake isn't there in the original. The editors can't even copy and paste properly.
  
  --
  At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
Wacom :( by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 11:00 · Score: 0

Both my Wacom tablets are "too old" (5-6 years) to work with the latest MacOS. My only recourse is to buy new tablets. Consider this before buying from Wacom.
1. Re:Wacom :( by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 12:20 · Score: 1
  
  Both my Wacom tablets are "too old" (5-6 years) to work with the latest MacOS. My only recourse is to buy new tablets. Consider this before buying from Wacom.
  Maybe your problem isn't so much Wacom, but that you bought an Apple product and expected to not get stuck on an upgrade treadmill.
  As a counterpoint, Wacom's Linux drivers, which are still maintained primarily by a Wacom employee named Ping Cheng, have excellent support, even with old tablets. I still have an Intuos 4 (early 2009) and an ancient Graphire 3 (2003) that both work just fine in Linux thanks to her work, and I've noticed that sometimes the old tablets gain new features added for other tablets over time due to how they're implemented. (The Graphire 3 gained rotation options it never had in Windows, as one example.)
  On Windows, both devices have drivers up to Windows 8, and a quick search indicates that, at least for the Intuos 4, at least one of the Vista/7/8 drivers will work in Windows 10 as well. Not as nice as the Linux driver situation, sure, but not as dire as yours despite both being a fair bit older than your tablets.
  Also, for what it's worth, if you don't like Wacom's support duration, you'll absoultely hate the non-Wacom alternatives. Vendors like Huion are making some pretty nice Cintiq-like devices now, but despite huge leaps in hardware quality, the drivers I've seen have all been really bare-bones and you're lucky if you ever see them release a newer driver than the one that came with the device for Windows or macOS. Though if you're using Linux it's not as dire, because I've noticed the Huion drivers can "speak wacom", so to speak, which lets them piggyback on the benefits of the wacom drivers and utilities like xsetwacom.
  None of this is any comfort if you're stuck because of specific applications, I know, but I thought it worth mention. As a possible workaround for your problem, perhaps you should look into running a supported OS (older macOS, maybe Windows) in a VM and passing the USB device through to it.
2. Re:Wacom :( by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-31 15:12 · Score: 0
  
  Thanks for taking the time for that write-up. I'll give my tablets a spin on Linux with those drivers - I'm thrilled that my old tablets don't have to be paper weights after all. Cheers!
3. Re:Wacom :( by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-01 02:53 · Score: 0
  
  No problem at all, hope it works out for you. The wacom driver itself should just work out of the box, plug in and it'll get detected. If you need configuration, the major desktop environments, like GNOME and KDE, should also have some GUI configuration options somewhere in their control panel-esque equivalents, though they're usually optional components, so you may have to choose to install from the package manager for them to show up. If the basic options they give you aren't enough, there's also the command-line xsetwacom tool, which gives you everything, and as a bonus can be called from scripts for even more advanced behaviour, like bulk-reassigning the tablet buttons for different applications.
  Like I said, though, the weak part of using Linux for tablets is lack of the big-name applications unless you can get them working in wine. It's not as dire as it used to be, though, back when the only option was gimp. Gimp's still around, and still works for photo editing, but I think the stand-out now is Krita, which is a truly excellent piece of art software even stacked against non-free products. If you need vector, I think inkscape's still the best option, and for animation there's Synfig Studio, Krita has some support for it, and possibly other options. Plus, while not specifically made for it, Blender can be used for non-3d video and animation editing in addition to 3d rendering and animation. (Speaking of Blender, there's a UI mod called Sensei Format that I've heard is supposed to make Blender more approachable.)
  There's also a fair bit of proprietary software that does support Linux, but it seems to be largely in 3d, animation, and CAD with less of a presence for illustration and photo editing. (Off the top of my head, I know Maya, Houdini, and Lightworks maintain Linux versions.)
  And, finally, a random note about desktop environments: most distributions ship with GNOME, but you should consider giving KDE a try if you don't find a bunch of configuration knobs daunting. You have a lot more control over KDE's appearance and behaviour, so you may be able to make it act more like you want instead of the GNOME-like way of having to change your workflow to match what GNOME devs want.
  Anyway, good luck with it. Wacom's hardware lasts forever and I agree it's a shame to have to stop using it because of the software.
wirless charging by e**(i+pi)-1 · 2018-01-31 15:01 · Score: 1

having worked with the apple stylus for a while now, the most annoying things is the charging. Cables are no option. A standard definitely needs a stylus which is wirelessly charged when near the tablet. One could even imagine a universal solution where the electonics would be the only thing vendor dependent. One could have a pen in a fancy fountain pen shape with an apple cartrige and write on an ipad, then if necessary change the cartridge to write on microsoft tablet etc.
1. Re:wirless charging by Geeky · 2018-01-31 23:31 · Score: 1
  
  Charging?
  Well, the Stylus with my Samsung Tab S3 tablet doesn't need charging - doesn't have a battery at all. I've used a Surface Pen and tried a friend's Apple Pencil, and the Samsung is just as good. Pressure sensitive and accurate.
  I'd hope that would become the standard, rather than yet another thing that needs charging or weird AAAA batteries that aren't widely sold.
  
  --
  Sigs are so 1990s. No way would I be seen dead with one.