the truth is, though that many of the chagers have intelligence built into the charger to rapidly cycle the battery. This intelligence is very battery specific and mandating a single charge configuration would inhibit future devices from take advantage of evolving battery technology.

Carriers didn’t get to choose wavelengths or encoding schemes. To promote competition in America, the government dictated what was open to carriers. Radio Shack is a good example. When digital cell phones first came out, Radio Shack carried Sprint, but was prohibited for carrying Sprint in all of its stores. So 70% of Radio Shacks carried Sprint and the rest carried what the government told them to.

I would bet the carriers would have gone with GSM, but the FCC had a problem with the 900mhz spectrum. That spectrum was used by cordless home landlines. The 900mhz spectrum is a better spectrum for wireless devices and the government forced cordless landline phones above the 2400mhz spectrum and opened the 900mhz spectrum to cell phone carriers.

After WWII it was understood that niether the Leage of Nations nor the Power Rangers had what it took to enforce cease fires and Mini/Micro-USB protocalls. When Buffy the Vampire Charger Slayer rips that thing right out of your wall, you will wish you had complied.

Well that is the sequence in which the workgroups are started but start dates are not completion dates. So it’s very easy for a later starting amendment to finish before an earlier amendment.

And let’s hear it for 802.11ac and 802.11ad! 802.11 is much too important to be bound by a single pass through the alphabet…

Also FWIW, 802.11a amended the original 802.11 standard. Who else misses their infrared or frequency hopping WLAN? (not me.)

And no inherent relationship between a, b, or g…. The letters are just an indexing scheme. The fact that a, b, and g cover three standards we useful for home wireless is a coincidence.

Aside: the standards committee skipped “i” and “l” to avoid confusion with one. And “o” to avoid confusion with zero. And “x” was left as a generic term in the way that advertisers refer to “brand x.”

It’s called “mission creep”.

The great thing about standards is that there are so many of them.

“Should I use the UN’s solution, which is likely inferior?”

Likely? Based on our experience with that noble institution, I’d say definitely. I don’t suppose anyone can explain what the heck the UN is doing mucking about in the charger business?