Push your own format, open it up, back a rival's, or collect from whichever one wins.
12 of 13 judged decisions were never undone and 1 held only in part. Several that held won the standard and lost the money.
Winning the standard and getting paid for it are separate fights. The companies that collected secured the payment first.
The plug Tesla gave away
On November 11, 2022, Tesla published the design of its charging connector, the plug on every Tesla car and every Supercharger, and invited any carmaker or charging network to use it. It renamed the plug the North American Charging Standard.
Tesla said at the time that cars with its plug outnumbered those with the rival CCS plug two to one, and that its network had 60% more charging posts than all the CCS networks combined. It was also facing federal charging money that, at first, required stations to serve every brand, which pointed the funding at the rival plug.
So Tesla stopped treating the plug as its own and made it everyone's.
In May 2023 Ford became the first major carmaker to commit to it. Within weeks the standards body SAE announced it would standardize the plug, and by February 2024 most major carmakers had said they would adopt it. Tesla kept the thing the plug was attached to: by mid-2025 its network had 7,377 charging stations and over 70,000 connectors.
That is a standards war, and one way to win it: give away the format and keep what sits behind it. Not every company in this guide made that trade. Some won the standard and watched someone else collect the money. Some lost the standard and got paid anyway.
What standards war is
A standards war is a fight over which technical format an industry will use, such as a plug, a chip design or a phone operating system, when everyone gains from using the same one and so only one or two can win. The decision is which part to play: push your own format, open it up, back a rival's, or collect from whichever one wins.
What makes a standard valuable is that others adopt it: carmakers, chipmakers, app developers. So the fight is less about having the best format and more about getting the rest of the industry to commit to yours, and about who collects the money once they have.
Why it is so hard
On paper the goal is to win. In practice, three things make it hard to know what winning means.
Winning the standard is not getting paid
A format can become universal while the profit goes to the company one layer up or one layer down. Adoption and money are separate prizes.
Your rivals have to agree
A standard only wins when competitors adopt it, and they have every reason to hold out, back a second option or wait for yours to fail.
The referee is often outside the industry
Lawmakers set connector rules, courts decide what a platform may charge, and funding rules favor one format over another. Many fights are settled by them.
The ways companies did it
The decisions on record take five shapes. Each is a different bet on where the money will end up once a standard wins.
Give the format away to win adoption
Let anyone use it, and make money somewhere else.
- Gave Android away free from 2005 so that Google Search and its ads rode along on every phone. Android reached roughly 72% of the world's mobile devices. But in 2024 Apple's App Store took in about $103.4B against Google Play's $46.7B, and Google paid Apple about $20 billion in 2022 to be the default search engine in Safari.
- AMD
- Extended the x86 chip design to 64-bit in 2003 while keeping old software running unchanged. Intel adopted AMD's extension from June 2004. It became the standard, and it did not translate into market share for AMD.
Get paid whichever format wins
Own the rights that every version needs, and let others fight over the name.
- Qualcomm
- Dropped its own 4G standard, UMB, in 2005 when no carrier adopted it, and backed the rival LTE instead while building up patents for it. By 2012 it held 81 of the key LTE patents. In 2019 Apple settled with Qualcomm, paid it, and signed a six-year license.
- Microsoft
- In 1980 licensed an existing operating system for $25,000 and bought it outright in 1981 for $50,000 more, keeping the right to sell it to every maker of IBM-compatible PCs. By 1999 a court found it held over 95% of the market.
Make the industry co-own your road
Give the companies who might back a second option a stake in yours.
- ASML
- In 2012 sold a 23 percent stake to its own customers, Intel, TSMC and Samsung, for EUR 3.85 billion, alongside their funding for its next-generation EUV machines. A customer that owns shares in the supplier has little reason to fund a rival one. ASML held 100 percent of the EUV market in 2024.
- TSMC
- From 2008 brought chip design software and component makers in early, so their tools were ready the day each new process started. The industry came to design on TSMC's calendar. Its global foundry share passed 60% in late 2023.
Attack the toll someone else collects
Challenge the company that controls the standard, in the market or in court.
- Epic Games
- Opened its own PC game store in 2018, paying developers 88% of each sale against Steam's 70%. In 2024 it had 295 million users, but only $255M of its $1.09B in spending came from other companies' games, and the store was still not profitable.
- Epic Games
- In August 2020 deliberately broke Apple's App Store payment rules and sued, asking not for money but for a rule change. It lost 9 of 10 counts, but won an order striking down Apple's rules against steering users to pay elsewhere. In 2025 a judge found Apple had willfully violated it.
Switch before you are made to
When a rule is about to retire your format, move on your own schedule rather than the regulator's.
- Apple
- Faced an EU rule requiring USB-C on phones from the end of 2024, and switched every iPhone 15 to USB-C in September 2023, a year early. It retired its own Lightning plug entirely in February 2025.
What 13 companies did
Here is every decision on record, placed by the year it was made and marked by how it turned out. Hover a mark, or open the table, for the company and the outcome.
13 standards wars decisions, 1980 to 2024
Each mark is one decision. "Never undone" means the company did not reverse it, not that it worked.
Show as a table
| Company | Year | Choice | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft | 1980 | License and buy existing OS | Never undone |
| AMD | 2003 | Backward-compatible x86 extension | Never undone |
| Alphabet (Google) | 2005 | Give the OS away free | Never undone |
| Qualcomm | 2005 | Abandon UMB for LTE | Never undone |
| TSMC | 2008 | Own the design calendar | Never undone |
| ASML | 2012 | Sell equity to customers | Never undone |
| Tesla | 2014 | Conditional non-assertion pledge | Never undone |
| Epic Games | 2018 | Launch subsidized rival store | Never undone |
| Epic Games | 2020 | Trigger bypass and sue | Kept in part |
| Tesla | 2022 | Open connector as standard | Never undone |
| Apple | 2023 | Switch iPhone to USB-C early | Never undone |
| Microsoft | 2024 | Pivot to subscription layer | Never undone |
| Tesla | 2024 | Open the network | Never undone |
Of the 13 decisions that can be judged, 12 were never undone and 1 held only in part, among them Epic's suit against Apple, which was settled in court rather than in the market.
"Never undone" is a weak word here. AMD's extension held and became the industry standard, and AMD did not gain share from it. Android held and won most of the world's phones, while more of the money from apps went to Apple. A company can hold its position in a standards war and still lose the part that pays.
One record is a looser fit for this decision. Microsoft's 2024 move to put Xbox games on rival consoles is about a subscription rather than a standard. That move has not been undone, though Game Pass has since stalled below PlayStation Plus.
How to run this decision
If you are weighing a version of this choice, here is what the record suggests doing, in order.
- Decide which prize you are fighting for, and write it down
The standard becoming universal, or the money you collect from it. The record has companies that got each and few that got both. Epic said up front it wanted a rule change rather than damages, and a rule change is what it won.
Seen in: Epic Games, 2020 - Secure how you get paid before you push the format
Qualcomm's patent licensing did not depend on which 4G standard won, which is why losing its own cost it so little. If your revenue only works when your exact format wins, you are making a far larger bet than the engineering suggests.
Seen in: Qualcomm, 2005 - Ask who collects the surplus if you win
Android won most of the world's phones and Apple took more of the app money. Before you give something away to win adoption, name the companies above and below you, and say which of them ends up with the margin your adoption creates.
Seen in: Google, 2005 - Turn the companies who would back a rival into partners
ASML sold shares to Intel, TSMC and Samsung. A customer that co-owns the only supplier has little reason to fund a second one. It is cheaper than winning a format war, and it is available more often than it is used.
Seen in: ASML, 2012 - Prefer extending the old format to replacing it
AMD extended x86 rather than starting over, and the company that owned the design adopted it. Keeping existing software working turns the incumbent's installed base from a defense into a way in.
Seen in: AMD, 2003 - When a rule is coming, move before the deadline
Apple switched to USB-C a year before the EU required it, once it saw that keeping two plug designs cost more than one. Tesla opened its plug while federal funding rules were pointing money at its rival.
Seen in: Apple, 2023 · Tesla, 2022 - Treat a lawsuit as a purchase, and name what it buys
Epic lost 9 of 10 counts against Apple and still won the one rule it sued for, because that rule was the only thing it asked for. A suit works when you can say in one sentence what it buys, and judge the result against that sentence rather than the scorecard.
Seen in: Epic Games, 2020
Warning signs
What it has looked like when this decision was going wrong.
- You are giving the format away with no answer to who collects the profit it creates.Google, 2005
- Winning the standard is being counted as winning, with no payment attached.AMD, 2003
- A new store or format depends on one hit product to pay for itself.Epic Games, 2018
All 13 cases
Each case is one company at one decision: what was on the table, what it chose, why, and what followed, with every fact sourced.
Never undone · 12
- Microsoft, 1980License and buy existing OS
- AMD, 2003Backward-compatible x86 extension
- Alphabet (Google), 2005Give the OS away free
- Qualcomm, 2005Abandon UMB for LTE
- TSMC, 2008Own the design calendar
- ASML, 2012Sell equity to customers
- Tesla, 2014Conditional non-assertion pledge
- Epic Games, 2018Launch subsidized rival store
- Tesla, 2022Open connector as standard
- Apple, 2023Switch iPhone to USB-C early
- Microsoft, 2024Pivot to subscription layer
- Tesla, 2024Open the network
Kept in part · 1
- Epic Games, 2020Trigger bypass and sue
Questions
- What is a standards war?
- A fight over which technical format an industry will use, such as a plug, a chip design or a phone operating system, when everyone gains from using the same one, so only one or two can win. Tesla's charging plug and the rival CCS plug in North America are a recent example.
- How do you win a standards war?
- By getting the rest of the industry to commit to your format, often by opening it up, keeping it compatible with what people already use, or giving would-be rivals a stake. But winning the standard is not the same as getting paid for it, so decide which you are after first.
- What are examples of standards wars?
- Tesla's NACS plug against CCS, AMD's 64-bit extension of x86 against Intel's plans, Android against iOS, Qualcomm's UMB against LTE in 4G, and Apple's Lightning plug against the USB-C rule in the EU.
- Can you lose a standards war and still win?
- Yes. Qualcomm's own 4G standard lost to LTE, but it had built up patents that LTE needed, and Apple later settled and signed a license. The format lost; the toll survived.
More from Stratrix
“What can you charge for your standard without losing the war to win it?”
See the pack — $499 →All Access
Every Casebook, three Strategy Packs a seat each year and the Analyst, for teams that face these decisions all year.
$1,999 a year · $499 a seatWhat is included →Test a decision, free
Set a live decision against the companies that made it before you.
AcquisitionsThe Distance TestDivestituresThe Divestiture TestDiversificationThe Diversification TestMake or buyThe Make-or-Buy TestNew analyses, by email
The defining moves in business, checked against the record, as they publish.