USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019) • Hacker News Board

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

#281

Post by bigstrat2003 » Mon, Oct 09, 2023, 10:36 PM UTC

palata wrote: post #206

Clamchop wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm reluctant to consider shoddy or noncompliant implementations as counting against a technology. If I did, then it'd follow that there's no such thing as a good idea, and I could only agree with that if I were having a bad episode of ennui.

> I'm reluctant to consider shoddy or noncompliant implementations as counting against a technology. I find it interesting that it is typically done with programming languages. "This programming languages allows people to write complicated, unreadable code, hence the language is bad".

In fairness there are plenty of people who think one should not consider it a language flaw if you can shoot yourself in the foot. See: basically every C programmer.

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

#282

Post by reilly3000 » Mon, Oct 09, 2023, 10:37 PM UTC

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…

This brought back many bad memories of trying to straighten a bent pin with needle-nose pliers and other tools that weren’t made of the job.

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

#283

Post by hedora » Mon, Oct 09, 2023, 10:37 PM UTC

scarface_74 wrote: post #249

addicted wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it’s news to iPhone people (and I say this as someone whose only used iPhones since he got a smartphone over a decade ago other than for 6 months where I used a Windows phone and 3 months of an Android phone), USB-C wasn’t invented with the iPhone 15. It’s been around a long time and most people have managed just fine, and absolutely loved the common cable. And everyone hated the iPhone user because you had to…

Grab a random USB C cable. Now answer a few questions. 1. What speed does the cable support? 2. How much data does the cable support? 3. Can it support video over USB-C?

4. Is it capable of charging this device?

5. Is it capable of charging devices when plugged into this charger?

6. If it can charge this combination of things, what wattage can it charge at?

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

#284

Post by HeckFeck » Mon, Oct 09, 2023, 10:38 PM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #259

dylan604 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>edit: Gah! you don't even have to do that just flip the flipping wires) Isn't that essentially what all ethernet cables do? it's not like this something never done before.

Ethernet hardware now has auto-crossover. However, that hasn't always been the case. There was a good decade in the 90's where you needed a special cable wiring if you wanted to connect two computers vs a computer to a switch.

I once used a crossover cable with an old 3Com card and a Linksys switch - whatever it sent down the wires, the Ethernet port on that switch was fried and has never done Tx or Rx since. I bandaged it with electric tape so I don't connect something else, and also in hope it will someday heal.

The 3Com card was unscathed. In fact, it is probably feeling stronger after that exertion.

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

#285

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Oct 09, 2023, 10:40 PM UTC

snarfy wrote: post #279

I was always hoping for a 3.5mm jack for a connector. Radially symmetric, it can go in any direction. I've heard arguments this could cause connection issues since it could rotate while connected, causing small contact misses, but I think that could be designed around.

[deleted]

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

#286

Post by mtoner23 » Mon, Oct 09, 2023, 10:41 PM UTC

AnotherGoodName wrote: post #254

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…

This is somewhat related as it's the next step of the above. The floating tongue of the USB connection is in the socket, not the on the cable. As in the most fragile part of the design is on the device side, not the cable side. This means that you can more easily break your $1000 device not the $2 cable. They repeated this mistake with USB-C as well. It's not hard to make a port where the cable is the free floating t…

Idk, lightning has the opposite problem where the contacts are exposed and degrade very quickly on the cable and need to be replaced constantly. Great for apple. And lightning has the gripping pins on the phone which degrade rather quickly too over repeated use. No cable is perfect I fear

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

#287

Post by bigstrat2003 » Mon, Oct 09, 2023, 10:42 PM UTC

nerpderp82 wrote: post #273

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The D-sub connectors were pretty intuitive, as far as I can remember. I never personally had a problem with them, but I can attest that people did. At my first job (a small computer shop), we had multiple customers who tried to jam their D-sub connector on wrong, and broke one or more pins off. Since this was back in the day when the cable was hard wired into the monitor, that generally meant they had to buy a new…

That is malicious, you cut off the d-sub connector and put another one on. I have never heard of someone replacing a monitor because the pins on the connector were damaged.

I've never heard of anyone replacing their hard wired monitor cable. And in any case I certainly wouldn't have had the skills, so I think "malicious" is an uncalled-for term here. Maybe my boss (the owner) knew better and chose to charge people for new monitors, but I definitely didn't.

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

#288

Post by NegativeK » Mon, Oct 09, 2023, 10:43 PM UTC

pseudosavant wrote: post #234

I think people really need to think about USB Type A in the context of the connectors it was 'competing' with: DSUB9 (VGA), RS-232 (serial), DB-25 (parallel), PS/2 (keyboard/mouse). These were, by modern standards, complete garbage connectors. Huge. Didn't stay plugged in securely unless the connector had screws. Only went one way. USB 1 stayed plugged in, required no screws, had higher bandwidth than any data port y…

The idea of trying to plug a serial, parallel, or VGA cable into a computer blindly seems hilariously unlikely.

And I distinctly remember getting excited about upgrading to a motherboard that supported USB for the hot-pluggability. I was overexcited, but still.

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

#289

Post by lxgr » Mon, Oct 09, 2023, 10:43 PM UTC

fragmede wrote: post #264

Izkata wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I feel like they prefer to keep using A-to-C or A-to-Micro because of power flow instead of packaging C-to-C (and from some quick Amazon searches, C output still looks rare, the majority of what I'm seeing is C input and A output on the power bank itself).

Those C input ports are usually also output ports.

Almost always, as I've noticed only after grabbing a friend's power bank and a C-to-lightning cable for a day trip...

I believe an USB-C device port is easier to implement than a host/power supply port, since the host is only allowed to supply Vbus after ensuring that it's connected to a device (by actively probing the resistor connected to the CC pins etc.), whereas a device port only needs to present that resistor. After all, even a passive C-to-micro-B cable can do that.

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

#290

Post by Sakos » Mon, Oct 09, 2023, 10:45 PM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #259

dylan604 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>edit: Gah! you don't even have to do that just flip the flipping wires) Isn't that essentially what all ethernet cables do? it's not like this something never done before.

Ethernet hardware now has auto-crossover. However, that hasn't always been the case. There was a good decade in the 90's where you needed a special cable wiring if you wanted to connect two computers vs a computer to a switch.

Easily going into the early 2000s. I remember trying to setup LAN parties in 2004/2005, where the wrong combination of patch or normal cable with hub/switch/PC made everything a nightmare.