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

USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 498 posts

Re: USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

#401

Post by zlsa »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #13
croon wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having one USB-C dock powering your laptop (maybe with a hungry GPU), as well as a couple of monitors with everything through just usb-c cables is my hope, and this is one step closer.

At which point do we change assumptions about safety of USB cables though? Myself and most people I know always considered USB connection to be safe-ish - that is, you can keep the cable connected on the supply side, and have the receiver end just lie on the desk on the floor, and the worst that could possibly happen is some tiny sparking if the stray end touches something conductive in a very unlucky way. But the mo…

I'm not 100% sure, but I believe a USB-C cable connected to a USB-C charger is cold by default until something is connected. Don't try this at home either, but it should also be perfectly safe to plug a USB-C cable into two different wall chargers.

Re: USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

#402

Post by hhh »

burntwater wrote: post #137
hhh wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surface still does have this connector, but can also charge from USB-C at reduced speed!

That's the perfect way to do it. If it's docked, you likely don't care as much about the charging speed. And if you're using on your lap or coffee table, you probably care more about the MagSafe aspect.

The Surface dock uses the magnetic connector.

Re: USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

#403

Post by londons_explore »

cma wrote: post #399
londons_explore wrote: post #396

I'd like to see the next version of this spec go from 5A 50V to 2A 2000V. 5 Amps is getting into danger territory with cables that are bent a lot and heating is concentrated in one high resistance area. Heating => melting => fire => deadly. Fire kills 10x more than electrocution. 2000V is also well into danger territory for humans, but we now have technology to make it human-safe for a child to gnaw through that wire…

Is there not technology to check changes in resistance? Even if it is in a small area as it heats it resistance should change much more rapidly than resistance changes when the entire cable heats up.

Careful resistance monitoring could probably make 5 Amps sufficiently safe to avoid fires. But that's about the limit of it without the cable starting to get very bulky (due to needing thicker copper to keep heating down).

If you want a cable spec which is never the limiting factor for whatever new gizmo you're trying to design, and therefore want a high power limit, then it's really the voltage that needs to increase, since it can go a lot higher before engineering the insulation gets hard.

Re: USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

#404

Post by Dylan16807 »

II2II wrote: post #346
zlsa wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be impossible for any set of non-damaged, non-defective, spec-compliant set of USB-C cables and peripherals to cause fires. The specifications are very carefully designed to prevent any combination of cables and devices from causing damage.

> It should be impossible for any set of non-damaged, non-defective, spec-compliant set of USB-C cables and peripherals to cause fires. That is a fairly significant list of conditions. As an example, I have encountered significant heating in a damaged power cable on the original power supply of a laptop from a reputable vendor. It's easy to argue the owner should immediately replace the damaged power supply, yet many…

> That is a fairly significant list of conditions.

It is, but it's a list of things that could fail even if there was only one kind of cable. The added risk from having a bunch of different kinds of cable with varying capability is quite small.

> I find it a bit disconcerting that we're talking about delivering 240 W over a cable that consumers are unlikely to differentiate from a 15 W cable (i.e. USB-C specification) or even from a 2.5 W cable (e.g a USB cable they would have used fifteen years ago).

All these voltages are low enough that you can expect any cable to support them. What really matters is the amps, and the difference is much smaller there. Specially marked cables support 5 amps. All other USB C cables support 3 amps. Old USB cables will vary, but it's been standard fare to push 2.4 amps over them for a long time.

Re: USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

#405

Post by PostThisTooFast »

pantalaimon wrote: post #169
_Microft wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe with an attached labelling machine to print the results in a way that could easily be affixed to the cable? ;) Oh, and please with an integrated wirecutter that automatically destroys cables if their results are too bad?

Heh I had a cursed micro-USB cable at the office that only carried power, no data - had fun debugging why my board did not work.

All micro-USB cables are cursed shit.

Re: USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

#406

Post by Dylan16807 »

Tempest1981 wrote: post #357
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was a kid, we had this massive high-voltage transformer that produced about 2,000 volts, at some sick amperage. We used it to make jacob's ladders. That was fun. Until I touched the two bars. I woke up on the other side of the room, smelling burning... me . That wasn't fun...

I learned this recently: > If you receive a shock, if can affect the rhythm of your heart and cause problems later. We’re taught to go and get an ECG after receiving a shock. Like jump in the car and go to the doctor or hospital, and have someone else drive you. If you’ve received a shock - go get checked out. -jaidan https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27259589

I saw that too but I wouldn't spread it as a fact without a better source.

Re: USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

#407

Post by prawn »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #342
darrenf wrote: post #242

I genuinely don’t understand how I’ve managed to be so lucky. That is, I absolutely do not disbelieve the many tales of woe I hear on HN (like the many in this thread) - but I’ve literally never put any thought into what cable I plug in to what device, and had no trouble that I can recall. It really had lived up to its hype for me so far. My USB-C devices are: a wireless charger, two MacBooks (one intel, one m1), a P…

I discovered my camera doesn’t charge unless it’s USB type A to USB type C. I think that’s the only weird thing I’ve encountered in my USB experiences. It’s the paralenz dive camera. There might even be good reasons for it, but I couldn’t guess.

I have a camera on a Ronin SC gimbal. The gimbal needs to connect to the camera via two USB-C ports using a specific cable (at one end).

Still generally stuck with an array of cables (hard drives, charging cameras, headlamps, legacy iPads, etc).

Re: USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

#408

Post by Dylan16807 »

Klinky wrote: post #389
IgorPartola wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better: add a color band to the connector. One line for low power, two for medium, three for high.

The problem is you have: Power: 18W, 30W, 45W, 60W, 100W, 240W Data: No Data, 480Mbps, 5Gbps, 10Gbps, 20Gbps, 40Gbps You also have a potential variety of modes that could influence your ability to achieve those speeds with certain devices.

That sounds like two markings, not too hard.

Also there are no power ratings below 60W, and I don't think "no data" is a valid cable.

Re: USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

#409

Post by Dylan16807 »

Reason077 wrote: post #301
qubitcoder wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to the world of USB-C! My general approach, and recommendations to others, is to purchase only Thunderbolt 3 cables. Yes, they're more expensive. But they'll essentially handle everything you throw at them, and behave as expected (due to the large protocol support [0,1]). Of course, this won't always be the case. But it's generally a safe assumption for now. [0] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/product…

> "My general approach, and recommendations to others, is to purchase only Thunderbolt 3 cables ... they'll essentially handle everything you throw at them" Is this really true? My Thunderbolt monitor (LG Ultrafine 4K) came with two cables: Thunderbolt 3 (for connecting to Thunderbolt laptops) and USB-C (for connecting to iPads etc which don't support Thunderbolt). Why would two different cables be needed if the Thun…

Some active thunderbolt cables don't properly support USB. A good one can do it all, as far as I'm aware.

Re: USB-C is about to go from 100W to 240W, enough to power beefier laptops

#410

Post by Dylan16807 »

xsmasher wrote: post #351
pantalaimon wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh I had a cursed micro-USB cable at the office that only carried power, no data - had fun debugging why my board did not work.

It seems that half of the micro-USB cables I get only work for charging, not for data. When I find one that does reliably connect I label it and then hide it where even I can't find it.

A 5-pack of reasonable quality micro-USB cables is less than $10, FYI.
Post reply on HN