Comment by georgefrowny

Manufacturers fucking hate being made to be interoperable and will try to swing a lock-in whenever they can.

They only do it in a green field when:

* They have big customers who demand it to avoid lock-in. Either the fear being left with orphaned equipment (e.g. car chargers being specified with MODBUS rather then a custom fieldbus), or they think their own gear will sell better with standard widgets (e.g. computer builders and USB). Militaries are especially keen on these requirements, and MIL standards drove loads of 20th century standardisations by economies of scale.

* They are forced to at regulatory gunpoint (some overlap with the above when the customer is a government).

* They think it'll be cheaper than the return from lock in, (e.g. easily cloned/replaced commodities like screws)

In a brown field where there are other standards or implementors around, they may also

* want to break into someone else's walled garden (everyone else wanting into Tesla chargers)

* Figure that there's a win-win as an attempted lock-in opportunity has passed (e.g. car makers trying to do a proprietary nozzle for lead free fuels would have just made their cars get a reputation for being a hassle to fuel).

When it comes to consumer goods, the asymmetry in the relationship is severe and regulators are constantly playing catch up. Everyone from Soda Stream to car charger manufacturers are trying to throw up walls and lock in customers before anyone can do anything about it.

Regulators only have limited bandwidth and if they act too early they get dragged by the companies (and their lackeys) for market interference.