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

USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 544 posts

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#211

Post by dylan604 »

m_0x wrote: post #204
whoooooo123 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with USB-a isn't that it's non reversible, it's that it's non-reversible _and_ rectangular, so it's not clear at a glance which way round it should go. All they had to do was make the connector have a non-symmetrical shape so that it's immediately obvious which way round it goes when you pick it up - you could do it without even looking. Think of how much time we'd have collectively saved with this minor…

> All they had to do was make the connector have a non-symmetrical shape so that it's immediately obvious which way round it goes when you pick it up - you could do it without even looking. Think of how much time we'd have collectively saved with this minor design change. I disagree. When connecting an HDMI cable I sometimes have issues, especially if in a weird angle. However I do concede is faster to connect an HDM…

Yeah, I want the connector that can be attached by only moving the TV a few inches, just enough to get my hand to fit and feel around, not something I have to rearrange the furniture for and break out some headlight to see which direction the cable is oriented. With BNC cables, I could do it with my eyes closed.

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#212

Post by Nextgrid »

petee wrote: post #165
Nextgrid wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The standard is also just terrible even if followed to the letter. The connectors are just too fragile for a day-to-day interconnect, and a fire risk when higher currents are involved. I've now had to replace 2 USB-C host ports (on expensive Apple devices, where an "official" repair would cost ~50% of the value of the device) despite taking reasonable care of my devices (under which care no other connectors ever fail…

Are you using Apple, or major-vendor cables? Im curious because delamination of a pin on 2 separate ports implies something catching/dragging on it, maybe there is something either poorly designed, or simply mangled in the end of one of your cables.

Major vendor cables, and the delamination was one connector's "finger" so not really cable-specific. The second connector looked fine at casual glance but there was something wrong with it as it wouldn't even hold connection with a USB2 device - too much slack.

I don't recall having this issue with any of the connectors it replaced. I have devices that are close to a decade old and all their USB/Ethernet/HDMI ports are still working just fine.

It's a terrible design that prioritizes form over function/reliability.

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#213

Post by palata »

I don't really get why people hate USB-A so much. I almost always plug my USB-A in the first try, because most of my devices have a clear up/down (e.g. a laptop or a docking station), and the plastic part always goes down.

Of course the vertical ports behind a machine are a bit harder to access, but... well anyway they are. And usually those are not the ones I unplug/replug often.

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#214

Post by Findecanor »

aranchelk wrote: post #164

My take on USB-A: aside from audio connectors that have axial symmetry (and have no meaningful orientation), I never used any reversible computer cables prior to USB-C, and that’s not the main issue. Nor is it the axis of symmetry of the casing allowing failed upside down plugin attempts. The shitty part of USB-A is that the tactile feedback of being slightly misaligned is identical to it being upside down. My experi…

I fail to understand what you mean with plugging a mini-DIN plug "off-center". Please explain!

I find it easy to use by feel alone. You can feel when the sleeve fits the socket. Then you can rotate it in the socket until it can go all the way in.

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#215

Post by dylan604 »

jdblair wrote: post #197

I used to "bedazzle" my USB cables. Bedazzling is when you decorate something with little plastic reflective jewel stickers. I always put the jewel in the same side (the "top") so I could feel which way the cable should be oriented. Then I could be confident I had the orientation correct without looking. I called this USBedazzling. The other folks in the office didn't think it was a funny as I did.

what if the port was in the opposite orientation, or worse, vertically oriented?

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#216

Post by sokoloff »

npunt wrote: post #139
lesuorac wrote: post #13

I know everybody is still on the high from USB-C but I'm still going to go on the record it will be one of the biggest disasters in cable history. 1) There's going to be video-only cables; low-voltage only cables; etc and this time everything is usb-c so you can literally only tell which ables work by testing all of the dozen cables instead of the 1-2 USB-As you have. 2) The connector is symmetrical but the pins aren…

I think this is a bit hyperbolic. Once you try to implement any standard in practice to billions of people & devices you're going to find the same constraints and similar trade-offs everywhere. Manufacturers are going to cheap out, always . There's no way around the fact that goods can get on the market claiming a thing that it doesn't do (perfectly) in practice. Tech is littered with semi-compliance. I hate to kick…

"I have to buy a totally different cable" is something that most of us with over 20 devices with USB-C ports on them have probably experienced, only it's worse than that as it's more like "I have to buy several different totally different cables and try to remember to return the ones that also don't work".

For a time at work, our desks had different docking stations for employees with Mac laptops or HP laptops. USB-C "standard" notwithstanding.

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#218

Post by lxgr »

petee wrote: post #152
jmbwell wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3) The most fragile part (the wafer in the center of the receptacle) is on the expensive-to-repair device, while the least fragile part is on the cheap-to-replace cable. HDMI makes this same mistake. With USB-A, at least the plastic part on the device is relatively robust, and with Lightning, both plug and socket were rather robust (albeit prone to debris incursion). With older pin-type connectors like VGA and DVI, t…

Im not sure this is true, the part in the cable is just tiny pins and far more vulnerable than the wafer. For years now I've dug woodchips and other junk out of my phones usb-c socket with paperclips and never came close to damage. It seems sufficiently recessed to prevent all but the most aggressive attack. Edit: in fact, trying now it seems to be perfectly recessed that I can't even push on it from an angle with th…

It's almost as if the designers have considered this potential failure mode for devices that often get dropped even while plugged into a charger :)

I can emphasize with many of the gripes people have with USB-C cables and supported modes being confusing, but the port is really, really well thought out: Make the cable the part that fails more easily [1]; make it so that the plug only minimally acts as a lever while partially or fully plugged in; cover the pins on the plug (because otherwise people will inevitably touch them, and these cables can carry up to 48 V of voltage).

[1] That part has actually worked well for everything but my Yubikey :( USB-A and an adapter it is for the next one.

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#219

Post by sytelus »

More interesting question for me is what exactly made USB possible? I understand that parallel communication wasn't possible because even for small differences in wire length, data on each wire will arrive at different times and that limits speed. So, people went with serial communication. But what exactly enabled high speed bit transfer? Why wasn't it possible before? Similarly, why USB2 speeds weren't possible before? What technical advances made it possible?

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#220

Post by imtringued »

jmbwell wrote: post #83
lesuorac wrote: post #13

I know everybody is still on the high from USB-C but I'm still going to go on the record it will be one of the biggest disasters in cable history. 1) There's going to be video-only cables; low-voltage only cables; etc and this time everything is usb-c so you can literally only tell which ables work by testing all of the dozen cables instead of the 1-2 USB-As you have. 2) The connector is symmetrical but the pins aren…

3) The most fragile part (the wafer in the center of the receptacle) is on the expensive-to-repair device, while the least fragile part is on the cheap-to-replace cable. HDMI makes this same mistake. With USB-A, at least the plastic part on the device is relatively robust, and with Lightning, both plug and socket were rather robust (albeit prone to debris incursion). With older pin-type connectors like VGA and DVI, t…

My mother bent the "least fragile part" on at least a dozen wires meanwhile the port itself kept working.
Post reply on HN