How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?

#1

Post by zdw » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 6:38 PM UTC

How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?
people.kernel.org

Re: How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?

#2

Post by mikece » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 7:15 PM UTC

At the risk of sounding like I'm making a parody of an XKCD comic -- https://xkcd.com/927/ -- there does need to be a new standard physical connection that's compliant with TB3 and at least 100W PD. Then USB-C can be for backward compatibility and the new connection (USB-D? TD3PD?) can be future-looking only: no legacy support.

Re: How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?

#3

Post by broabprobe » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 7:22 PM UTC

Not to mention thunderbolt 3 even!

Re: How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?

#4

Post by kevin_thibedeau » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 7:28 PM UTC

mikece wrote: post #2

At the risk of sounding like I'm making a parody of an XKCD comic -- https://xkcd.com/927/ -- there does need to be a new standard physical connection that's compliant with TB3 and at least 100W PD. Then USB-C can be for backward compatibility and the new connection (USB-D? TD3PD?) can be future-looking only: no legacy support.

I don't honestly know why anyone would design a product that used 100W via USB. Even without the issue of dodgy cables, it just sounds like a bad idea and a solution to a problem that shouldn't exist. If I ever ran across such a product I would question their other engineering decisions and pass on the purchase.

Re: How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?

#5

Post by delish » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 7:28 PM UTC

For anyone else who was confused by:

> A USB 3.0 capable USB-B plug was physically larger than a 2.0 plug and would not fit into a USB 2.0-only receptacle.

recall that it's this USB-hubby one: https://www.amazon.com/TNP-SuperSpeed-Connector-Bi-Direction...

Re: How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?

#6

Post by wmf » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 7:30 PM UTC

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #4

mikece wrote: post #2

At the risk of sounding like I'm making a parody of an XKCD comic -- https://xkcd.com/927/ -- there does need to be a new standard physical connection that's compliant with TB3 and at least 100W PD. Then USB-C can be for backward compatibility and the new connection (USB-D? TD3PD?) can be future-looking only: no legacy support.

I don't honestly know why anyone would design a product that used 100W via USB. Even without the issue of dodgy cables, it just sounds like a bad idea and a solution to a problem that shouldn't exist. If I ever ran across such a product I would question their other engineering decisions and pass on the purchase.

This is used for charging laptops. Personally, I love having a single cable for power, USB, and DisplayPort.

Re: How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?

#7

Post by msbarnett » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 7:33 PM UTC

This only seems to be counting USB-C to USB-C USB 3 cables

The actual situation is much worse when you add in passive and active C-to-C Thunderbolt, MHL, DP, and HDMI cables, some but not all combinations of which may or may not optionally support some but not all combinations of other signals as well — eg) a passive TB3 C-to-C cable will support DP and USB3 (but not MHL or HDMI), but an active TB3 C-to-C cable will be guaranteed to support only TB3, but may optionally support DP.

Visually making a complex matrix of incompatible things look identical has resulted in an absolutely hopeless situation for consumers, who trained by decades of “connector shape == bus” think that USB-C is a monolithic bus that supports all of these different use cases and then don’t understand why they can’t “just”, say, plug their USB-C Nintendo Switch (wired for USB 3.0 w/ a DP alt. mode signal) into a USB-C eGPU (wired for TB3) using whatever “USB-C cable” they have lying around, which could potentially support none of the incompatible protocols either port can handle anyway.

Re: How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?

#8

Post by wmf » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 7:35 PM UTC

mikece wrote: post #2

At the risk of sounding like I'm making a parody of an XKCD comic -- https://xkcd.com/927/ -- there does need to be a new standard physical connection that's compliant with TB3 and at least 100W PD. Then USB-C can be for backward compatibility and the new connection (USB-D? TD3PD?) can be future-looking only: no legacy support.

You could call it RichPort since the cables will be over $30 and the ports will only by found on >$1,000 Macs. I remember the old Firewire days and it was certainly simple but I don't know if the ecosystem was better overall.

Re: How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?

#9

Post by txcwpalpha » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 7:35 PM UTC

wmf wrote: post #6

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't honestly know why anyone would design a product that used 100W via USB. Even without the issue of dodgy cables, it just sounds like a bad idea and a solution to a problem that shouldn't exist. If I ever ran across such a product I would question their other engineering decisions and pass on the purchase.

This is used for charging laptops. Personally, I love having a single cable for power, USB, and DisplayPort.

I personally also really love that I can charge my phone and my laptop with the same cable (I have a phone with USB-C that uses PD along with a 2016 MacBook Pro). It makes cable management much simpler, and I find it invaluable that when traveling I only need to bring one single charger with me.

Re: How many kinds of USB-C to USB-C cables are there?

#10

Post by crispyambulance » Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 7:35 PM UTC

So frustrating.

One would think that after nearly 2 decades of consumer confusion over USB cables that it would be possible to just mark the cables in a clear way with a non-confusing, easily looked up logo (or better, with a alphanumeric-code).

It makes me wonder if manufacturers are just doing this to increase the churn of cable sales, so consumers end up buying more cables because "some work and some don't".