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

Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

philip.greenspun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 511 posts

Re: Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

#301

Post by btbuilder »

rightbyte wrote: post #284
onetimeuse92304 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The insertion cycles are only for proper insertion. Like when you are looking at it and doing it at a correct angle. Also, rated lifetime does not take into account things like tugging the cable to the side of your PC because your foot got tangled in it. USB C is extremely fragile due to its size and not much can be done to help it. USB C might be created to withstand more insertion cycles. After all it is meant to b…

> yes, connectors got much better in the past decades Really? How is e.g. the HDMI connectors "better" than the VGA connectors? VGA connectors seems far more robust to me. Same with d-sub mouse connectors. I guess the signal rating is better now but the old ones didn't need high frequency capabilities.

I bent a few pins in a VGA connector due to misalignment once. This was when the cable was hardwired into the monitor!

Re: Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

#302

Post by janoc »

arcticbull wrote: post #237
holoduke wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with usb c (but also mini and micro) is the weak connector on the device itself. The way its connected to the board is way weaker than a large usb a connector on a motherboard. Accidentally pullen a keyboard while attached will for sure destroy a usb c port. A usb a most likely survive.

That's going to depend on the connector. Plenty have through-hole mounts. You can also get surface-mount type A connectors.

They all do. Yet it still doesn't help. Those 4 little retaining lugs are fixed into the board only by solder, which is fragile and will crack after a while, esp. when the connector is mated/demated constantly and forces are applied to it.

USB A has those lugs much larger and usually also bent under the board or twisted, so the connector isn't fixed into the PCB only by solder.

USB C and micro USB are mostly designed for clamshell enclosures such as a typical phone - in that case the connector shell is supported by the enclosure itself (ideally through some flexible padding) and not only by the flimsy contacts/solder lugs.

However, there are plenty of devices on the market where these connectors are not supported like that because the designer has been an idiot - and guess which devices end up in the landfill with broken off connectors the most.

Breaking the old school USB A, square USB B or mini USB is almost impossible like this unless one applies really unreasonable amount of force. I have only ever managed to accidentally destroy a USB A port once like that by accidentally hitting a USB stick hanging out of it - but the board and the adjacent ports were fine, only the port shell and contacts were destroyed.

Re: Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

#303

Post by y7 »

rightbyte wrote: post #284
onetimeuse92304 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The insertion cycles are only for proper insertion. Like when you are looking at it and doing it at a correct angle. Also, rated lifetime does not take into account things like tugging the cable to the side of your PC because your foot got tangled in it. USB C is extremely fragile due to its size and not much can be done to help it. USB C might be created to withstand more insertion cycles. After all it is meant to b…

> yes, connectors got much better in the past decades Really? How is e.g. the HDMI connectors "better" than the VGA connectors? VGA connectors seems far more robust to me. Same with d-sub mouse connectors. I guess the signal rating is better now but the old ones didn't need high frequency capabilities.

You never had one of the pins slightly bending so the connector wouldn't fit anymore and you had to manually try to bend it back?

Re: Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

#304

Post by rightbyte »

rezonant wrote: post #291
rightbyte wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> yes, connectors got much better in the past decades Really? How is e.g. the HDMI connectors "better" than the VGA connectors? VGA connectors seems far more robust to me. Same with d-sub mouse connectors. I guess the signal rating is better now but the old ones didn't need high frequency capabilities.

VGA connectors were incredibly irritating to deal with, especially since so many of them were equipped with smooth screwing bolts with very little area to spin them with your fingers. I for one don't miss this.

If you wanted to have quick insert connection you could just not tighten the screws. I almost never tightened the screws, but it was good on monitors which were pivoting.

I am writing this on a screen where the HDMI connector pops out if a even touch it.

Re: Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

#305

Post by fmajid »

arcticbull wrote: post #176
userbinator wrote: post #154

My experience has shown that USB C connectors are far more fragile than A, and every time I plug one in, for some reason the fit just feels vague and unsatisfying. An A plug, when you get it the right way, slides in solidly. As others have mentioned, C seems to have been designed to be the smallest possible, which makes sense for mobile devices, but not for a desktop and its peripherals.

Interestingly enough, they're specced the opposite way. > Standard USB has a minimum rated lifetime of 1,500 cycles of insertion and removal, the Mini-USB receptacle increased this to 5,000 cycles, and the newer Micro-USB and USB-C receptacles are both designed for a minimum rated lifetime of 10,000 cycles of insertion and removal. [1] > To accomplish this, a locking device was added and the leaf-spring was moved fro…

Micro-USB had on paper better insertion/removal cycles than Mini-USB, but in practice Micro-USB connectors were flimsy garbage and Mini-USB fairly robust for the size.

Re: Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

#306

Post by rightbyte »

y7 wrote: post #303
rightbyte wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> yes, connectors got much better in the past decades Really? How is e.g. the HDMI connectors "better" than the VGA connectors? VGA connectors seems far more robust to me. Same with d-sub mouse connectors. I guess the signal rating is better now but the old ones didn't need high frequency capabilities.

You never had one of the pins slightly bending so the connector wouldn't fit anymore and you had to manually try to bend it back?

Sure. But if I remember correctly the cable ends are both male, so it was never the device that got bent. In some sense weakness on the right part is a feature.

Re: Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

#307

Post by rightbyte »

btbuilder wrote: post #301
rightbyte wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> yes, connectors got much better in the past decades Really? How is e.g. the HDMI connectors "better" than the VGA connectors? VGA connectors seems far more robust to me. Same with d-sub mouse connectors. I guess the signal rating is better now but the old ones didn't need high frequency capabilities.

I bent a few pins in a VGA connector due to misalignment once. This was when the cable was hardwired into the monitor!

Ye maybe I am just nostalgic. Hard to tell.

Re: Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

#308

Post by mordae »

fmajid wrote: post #305
arcticbull wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly enough, they're specced the opposite way. > Standard USB has a minimum rated lifetime of 1,500 cycles of insertion and removal, the Mini-USB receptacle increased this to 5,000 cycles, and the newer Micro-USB and USB-C receptacles are both designed for a minimum rated lifetime of 10,000 cycles of insertion and removal. [1] > To accomplish this, a locking device was added and the leaf-spring was moved fro…

Micro-USB had on paper better insertion/removal cycles than Mini-USB, but in practice Micro-USB connectors were flimsy garbage and Mini-USB fairly robust for the size.

Not exactly flimsy, but they often have super high friction, translating into some seriously rough handling.

Re: Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

#309

Post by mordae »

userbinator wrote: post #154

My experience has shown that USB C connectors are far more fragile than A, and every time I plug one in, for some reason the fit just feels vague and unsatisfying. An A plug, when you get it the right way, slides in solidly. As others have mentioned, C seems to have been designed to be the smallest possible, which makes sense for mobile devices, but not for a desktop and its peripherals.

I don't know. I can easily lift my phone by the USB-C cable. And as for the connectors, sure USB-A usually has 4 through-hole mounting and through-hole live pins[^1] so the connection to the board is rock solid, but USB-C connectors, despite having surface-mounted live pins tend to have shallow mounting pins as well[^2]. I find it pretty durable.

[^1]: https://jlcpcb.com/partdetail/ShouHan-10_0_4C6_3ZB/C6386909

[^2]: https://jlcpcb.com/partdetail/Dealon-USB_TYPE_C018/C2927038

Re: Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)

#310

Post by Hedepig »

userbinator wrote: post #154

My experience has shown that USB C connectors are far more fragile than A, and every time I plug one in, for some reason the fit just feels vague and unsatisfying. An A plug, when you get it the right way, slides in solidly. As others have mentioned, C seems to have been designed to be the smallest possible, which makes sense for mobile devices, but not for a desktop and its peripherals.

At the risk of sounding a bit dumb, I shorted my motherboard with a USB A, it felt like I got it right, and pushed it in, at which point it shutdown. Fortunately there didn't seem to be any permanent damage
Post reply on HN