I can!
In the cycling industry, I actually get a sense that there's an aversion to change based on my time in it. The status quo is generally good, so there needs to be strong reasons to change (boost is actually a good idea, so are tapered head tubes, and I even empathize with press fit BBs because carbon, etc). \[Royal\] we, or the royal you rather because I'm officially an out of industry keyboard warrior, are generally a mechanically inclined group who know about chasing and facing and taps and threads and carbon paste and why they all do and don't make sense. We understand how to make decisions about mechanical things because bikes are mechanically dominated historically.
Then iBikes come along. There communications protocols and plugs out the Ying yang. Di2 cross compatibility is new to the last few years, and some how still cannot be charged from ebike power. The 18650 battery cell is used in Tesla's and Laptops and ebikes, yet we end up with >3 different connectors and chargers for a single iBike if we're lucky. Theres no standard for motor or battery mounts, one cannot even upgrade those parts within the same brand often. What I see with the iBike is that nobody is really working towards it as an ecosystem, just a bunch of independent systems. For the cycling industry electronics are new. There's no status quo, and we're exploring new things (connectors, protocols, battery management, etc) so change happens rapidly for even less significant reasons than boost. The outsider brain trust, i.e. those in motorsport who are brought in to work on bikes, I think may not be fully aware of the good standardization and backwards compatibility in cycling
Nov. 14, 2018, 7:44 p.m. - Sanesh Iyer
I can! In the cycling industry, I actually get a sense that there's an aversion to change based on my time in it. The status quo is generally good, so there needs to be strong reasons to change (boost is actually a good idea, so are tapered head tubes, and I even empathize with press fit BBs because carbon, etc). \[Royal\] we, or the royal you rather because I'm officially an out of industry keyboard warrior, are generally a mechanically inclined group who know about chasing and facing and taps and threads and carbon paste and why they all do and don't make sense. We understand how to make decisions about mechanical things because bikes are mechanically dominated historically. Then iBikes come along. There communications protocols and plugs out the Ying yang. Di2 cross compatibility is new to the last few years, and some how still cannot be charged from ebike power. The 18650 battery cell is used in Tesla's and Laptops and ebikes, yet we end up with >3 different connectors and chargers for a single iBike if we're lucky. Theres no standard for motor or battery mounts, one cannot even upgrade those parts within the same brand often. What I see with the iBike is that nobody is really working towards it as an ecosystem, just a bunch of independent systems. For the cycling industry electronics are new. There's no status quo, and we're exploring new things (connectors, protocols, battery management, etc) so change happens rapidly for even less significant reasons than boost. The outsider brain trust, i.e. those in motorsport who are brought in to work on bikes, I think may not be fully aware of the good standardization and backwards compatibility in cycling