Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

debugger.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 624 posts

Re: USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

#491

Post by ziml77 »

notacoward wrote: post #287
jeremymcanally wrote: post #4

Really? I find it to be a game changer for me. The fact that my laptop, Switch, iPad, and several other devices can all share a charge has made my life much easier. I can just sprinkle a few of them throughout the house and never be without power. Before it was always a hunt to find a cable, or I had to be in [x] room to charge [y] device because that's where the charger lived. Plus, I can charge my MacBook on either…

This doesn't seem like a factor in favor of USB-C. I regularly charge any of two dozen USB device in my house from any of a half dozen smart chargers, using too many micro-B cables to count, and it has been months since I spent even one moment thinking about compatibility among them all. This kind of setup was already common. My USB-C devices are the ones I need to worry about. All of the chargers I've bought (not th…

Bringing up the Switch is unfair to USB-C. That would be like complaining about IEC C14 if Nintendo decided to make a connector that was just a hair larger and swapped hot and ground. Not being compliant is completely Nintendo's fault.

Re: USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

#492

Post by ses1984 »

falcolas wrote: post #267
shadowgovt wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Key thing is in all three cases, the same cables work. The end nodes vary in capability, but it's nice I don't have to fish out my crescent-ended connector to differentiate from my flat-ended connector because I needed a higher transfer rate. One stack of USB-C cables lets me connect all my devices together. Whether they make sense connected together is up to me.

If you have one of the expensive "supports everything" cables (100w charging, Thunderbolt 3 @ 40mbps) then yeah, the same cable will work. I couldn't even find a 10' one on Amazon with a cursory look. Some of the 6' ones were in excess of $70.

Both 100w charging and high speed data transfer are problems that get harder over long distances, and trying to do them both in the same cable requires many non-trivial feats of engineering, quality materials, and manufacturing.

No one ever said USBC was going to bring these features to cheap $5 cables you buy in the checkout at the corner bodega.

Re: USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

#493

Post by chipsa »

chrisseaton wrote: post #342
curryst wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's rather ubiquitous, I'm surprised you haven't seen them. The plastic bits in the USB 3 ports in my motherboard, case, keyboard, _and_ the USB ports built into my monitor arms are all blue. Lower USBs are black. It's not universal, but it is very common.

Aren't those the ports? The ports are blue. I haven't seen a blue connector.

The metal bits aren't, but the plastic inside is.

Re: USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

#494

Post by Dylan16807 »

floatingatoll wrote: post #437
blinky1456 wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it matter if you plug 15amp device into a 25amp oulet? Surely It will only use 15amps unless it short circuits?

It matters if it short circuits, yes. (Electricians, I hope I got this right enough to convey the 'why'; I know it won't be perfect.) The outlet plugs specify the circuit breaker limit. Most consumer electronics in the US use a 15amp plug, which can be plugged into a 15amp outlet or a 20amp outlet — but no higher, due to physical incompatibilities in the outlet design. The electronics that use the 15amp or 20amp plug…

Any device that becomes significantly more dangerous when the breaker trips at 25 instead of 20 amps is relying on way too thin of a safety margin and I would consider it a lurking hazard on any circuit.

Re: USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

#495

Post by QuercusMax »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #483
floatingatoll wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Word of warning, for those reading this far: The Switch and Switch Dock are not USB-C devices. That you’re able to plug in a USB-C charger or USB-C device and see it supposedly work just means that you haven’t yet encountered the scenario(s) that can electronically damage the Switch. Nintendo’s warranty does not cover this damage when it occurs, requiring a full-cost repair or replacement as you connected unlicensed…

> The Switch and Switch Dock are not USB-C devices. Why? Why was it so hard for them to implement USB-C the proper way? Why were they allowed (and why did they want) to use patented USB-C plugs if they didn't want to actually implement USB-C? The only explanation I can come up with is they intended to earn money from repairing.

Simpler than that - they don't want others to produce Switch-compliant accessories which compete with their own.

Re: USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

#496

Post by thetinguy »

dheera wrote: post #270
floatingatoll wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Word of warning, for those reading this far: The Switch and Switch Dock are not USB-C devices. That you’re able to plug in a USB-C charger or USB-C device and see it supposedly work just means that you haven’t yet encountered the scenario(s) that can electronically damage the Switch. Nintendo’s warranty does not cover this damage when it occurs, requiring a full-cost repair or replacement as you connected unlicensed…

I wish there were legal protections around this. Using a standard plug means it should accept the standard for that plug.

Nintendo is following the protocol. They’re using an officially supported alternate mode.

Re: USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

#497

Post by DanBC »

beowulfey wrote: post #383
danhor wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All (or most) of the reports of switches being bricked stem for 3rd party docks, where the dock is at fault and using 9v for signal pins, see https://hackaday.com/2019/08/04/the-not-quite-usb-c-of-ninte...

Whether or not this is the case, Nintendo makes it very clear in their warranty that using an unauthorized charger is not covered. They definitely did not intend for it to be a universal port.

Nintendo say that for all their devices, even the ones that use Nintendo-specific connectors.

Re: USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

#498

Post by qwerty456127 »

QuercusMax wrote: post #495
qwerty456127 wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Switch and Switch Dock are not USB-C devices. Why? Why was it so hard for them to implement USB-C the proper way? Why were they allowed (and why did they want) to use patented USB-C plugs if they didn't want to actually implement USB-C? The only explanation I can come up with is they intended to earn money from repairing.

Simpler than that - they don't want others to produce Switch-compliant accessories which compete with their own.

Why use a standard connector then? Why not use a proprietary one? The USB-C connector itself is far from perfect and I can see no reason to use it if actual compatibility is not what you seek.

Re: USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

#499

Post by avhon1 »

rubatuga wrote: post #402
rattray wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, that's what I'd call a mess. The purpose of a standard should be that if a product conforms to it, the consumer can trust that the product will work. That isn't the case with USB-C. I've had some "USB-C" cables that can charge but not transmit video, some that can transmit video but not charge, and some that can do both. It shouldn't be possible to sell a cable that can't do both and call it USB-C.

You can't have a cable that transmits video and does not charge. Even when using USB-C for video, e.g. displayport, it negotiates through a USB 2.0 connection which guarantees 5V @ 500mA.

According to the standard, you can't.

There is nothing, however, stopping a manufacturer from making USB-C cables with very fine-gauge power conductors[1]: electrons could flow, and a data connection could be negotiated, but resistive losses at high power consumption would cause the voltage to sag below the minimum of 4.40V.

Such a cable would not be standards-compliant, since USB-C cables are required to be able to carry 3 Amperes at 20V. However, for pure data-transfer purposes, the cable would work fine, and be cheaper that fully-compliant cables.

[1] After all, a full-featured cable needs to fit 16 (!) conductors, and the shield, into one flexible cable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C#Cables_2

Re: USB-C was supposed to simplify our lives, but instead it’s a total mess

#500

Post by freeone3000 »

ses1984 wrote: post #490
freeone3000 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So now we're in a world where the cables have different functionality, but you can't tell them apart. So you have to keep the cable with the device it came with and you lose the benefit of having the single connnector format entirely!

We're in a world where if you have a high speed cable designed for 4k60p HDR, in a pinch you can also use it to charge your phone. In a pinch you can also use it for a data transfer. In a pinch, you can also use your charging cable to transmit 720p video. The cables should be marked, if they are not marked with their capability then buy them from another vendor that does mark them. It's no different than ethernet cab…

Ethernet cables of any repute have the category printed onto the insulation.
Post reply on HN