21–30 of 231 posts
I disagree. It's not a mess. It works well. So much better than USB 2.0. I don't have to try to 'key' it correctly when plugging it in and the connections are fast and 'just work'.
For sake of a simple example, consider designing a rechargeable flashlight. For whatever reason, you'd like it to be rechargeable over a USB-C port. You also want the flashlight to charge as fast as possible from whatever power source you connect it to, because you know people will need to charge it quickly. To do that, the ideal solution would be a single IC that sits on the USB port and monitors D+/D-, CC1/2, and the rail voltages and sets a few GPIOs to tell your battery charge circuit what is and isn't allowed on this port.
Inexplicably, _that chip doesn't exist_. It does exist for USB 2.0 (that is, BC1.2), available from several vendors, and works perfectly. There are solutions marketed for Type-C... but they don't touch USB 2.0. That means someone who uses a Type-A to Type-C cable with a beefy older Type-A charger doesn't get fast charging. There are some bigger Type-C products that might work, but they're incredibly complex, physically large, expensive, often in BGA packages, and will blow out every line on your budget.
Admittedly it's been about a year since I turned over every stone in the industry searching for my Magical Unicorn Charging IC (like the ones that exist for USB 2.0...), but I do pay attention to new product releases and I haven't seen anyone going in this direction. Probably you could get something customized (at medium volumes) or certainly full custom (at high volumes), but if volumes or margins are low enough to require COTS parts, there really aren't any workable solutions.
I am confident that Type-C's market penetration will skyrocket as soon as the difficulty and cost of actually integrating it into a product reaches sane levels.
Btw, if you are still using some of these cables coloring one side with a bright colored Sharpie will change your life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For one thing, Lightning is smaller. That's not just a technicality from looking at Wikipedia. Its design is noticeably more compact and overall nicer in terms of real-world "feel".
I understand Lightning is a worse connector because it places the “moving parts” (the bendable pins) in the recipient “female” socket in the host device which is subject to more wear-and-tear than the insertable plug which is on the cable which is more disposable. USB-C corrects this by placing more of the mechanical complexity in the plug again - though I’m wary of the thin plastic “tongue” in the socket.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For one thing, Lightning is smaller. That's not just a technicality from looking at Wikipedia. Its design is noticeably more compact and overall nicer in terms of real-world "feel".
I understand Lightning is a worse connector because it places the “moving parts” (the bendable pins) in the recipient “female” socket in the host device which is subject to more wear-and-tear than the insertable plug which is on the cable which is more disposable. USB-C corrects this by placing more of the mechanical complexity in the plug again - though I’m wary of the thin plastic “tongue” in the socket.
Having a single port for everything is bad idea, because the electrical interface can't possibly be the same for everything.
Making this happen is obviously a really hard task from an engineering standpoint. Device makers have to employ various adapters internally, so that everything works on the same interface.
No wonder manufacturers are suffering to keep up!
Would it hurt anyone to put two USB-C ports on a smartphone? Thank goodness my phone still has a 3.5mm jack, but some people would like to charge their phone and listen to (wired) audio without having to buy an adapter. And it's not like this is an uncommon use case either, anecdotally some of my friends with iPhones face this issue.
Not putting enough ports on devices is a crucial problem. Apple with their stupid single port is just idiotic. The best port selection with usb-c is on the 2015 chrome pixel laptop. 2 usb-c, 2 usb-a. Just having a single usb-c has caused endless pain, all so apple could sell stupid dongles. The new google pixelbook 2018 is a great form factor, except they only have 2 usb-c, they dropped usb-a. The reason was probably…
Apple with their stupid single port is just idiotic This is on a single specific device. The best port selection with usb-c is on the 2015 chrome pixel laptop. 2 usb-c, 2 usb-b You mean USB-A. Just having a single usb-c has caused endless pain, all so apple could sell stupid dongles. Nobody I know using MacBooks has a particular problem with this. A dongle would be required in most cases to connect to an external dis…
Agreed.
My wife has a MacBook with a single USB-C port. Having only one port has exactly zero impact on her. The only thing she uses it for is for charging, and very occasionally plugging in a tiny hard drive to look at her iPhoto library which is larger than the computer's built-in SSD.
Everything else in her lifestyle is wireless. And that's where Apple has been going for a long time. She is Apple's target market for a single USB port device.
If you're the kind of person whose lifestyle or workflow necessitates more than one port, you buy a computer with more than one port. Doesn't seem like rocket surgery. I don't understand why OC is so upset.
As for Apple selling more dongles, I don't think that's what's behind it. Apple would probably rather have the shelf space for higher-margin in-house products than use the space for SKUs from another company. I doubt Apple is making bank on USB-C dongles.
“Why doesn’t Apple just get rid of Lightning and use USB-C on their iPhones!” This is why. Ignoring the momentum Lightning had from being a few years older, this is a great reason not to switch. Sadly I know this has become a big problem for people on the new Macs. Plug a USB-C hub in? Now that port doesn’t do Thunderbolt or Display Port. How do you know that? Trial and error. Very un-Appley.