Have Compagnolo components ever been compatible with other maker's parts? As far as I know Shimano and SRAM are compatible, and most of the smaller players work in the same way. Compagnolo, AFAIK, is the only outlier here.
As for the seat post, it's these molded carbon frames that seem to be built for short use and then the trash that are problematic in my eyes. They're just wasteful and most of the people buying them are doing it just to buy some time for their various races.
Having gotten in to triathlons a bit lately, I'm constantly annoyed that someone can literally buy gear to make themselves minutes faster, even though our engines may be comparable. I wish the organizing bodies would standardize the equipment for competition.
In the days of friction shifting, it used to be common to mix and match components across the entire drivetrain. You could have shifters, derailleurs, chains, freewheels, and hubs all from different manufacturers.
Drivelines are more integrated now, with derailleurs, cog tooth profiles, chains, and shifters designed as a system with minimal thought given to cross compatibility. At best you could use a non-Campy/non-Shimano chain.
My understanding is that they aren't, at least where we are talking about indexed shifting (which is pretty much everything these days). The amount of cable pull per "click" is different between SRAM and Shimano, which means you can't use a Shimano shifter with a SRAM derailleur. Or maybe that's just true in MTB world and not road bike world, not sure.
OTOH, chain, cogs and chainrings are pretty much compatible, at least within the constraints imposed by the changes in chain width to accomodate the newer, denser cassettes. Eg, 10 speed chain or 9 speed chain won't work with an 11-speed drivetrain.
The flip side to this (triathlon gear) is ITU draft legal racing, where it's basically like a criterion and requires the same UCI compliant bike setups as a road race would. This solves the problem in one way but creates a new one. Take a look at the world standings (for women, especially). Gwen Jorgensen is a beast, for sure, but she wins because she's a ridiculously strong runner who managed to get her swim good enough so she could hang with the leaders. On the bike she just has to ride with the pack. ... then, like Mirinda Carfrae in Ironman, leaves everyone in her dust on the run. I'm not sure this is fairer or not.
Not really. Exceptional cyclists who are average runners still do very well on full iron distances. "Average runner" meaning they can crank out a 3:15-3:30 marathon after the first two events (so not really "average at all).
That said, people who come into triathlon from a running background do tend to do better than swimmers or cyclists who have to learn the other two events.
As for the seat post, it's these molded carbon frames that seem to be built for short use and then the trash that are problematic in my eyes. They're just wasteful and most of the people buying them are doing it just to buy some time for their various races.
Having gotten in to triathlons a bit lately, I'm constantly annoyed that someone can literally buy gear to make themselves minutes faster, even though our engines may be comparable. I wish the organizing bodies would standardize the equipment for competition.