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

I stopped trusting USB-C cable labels and started testing them

makeuseof.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 266 posts

Re: I stopped trusting USB-C cable labels and started testing them

#91

Post by revolvingthrow »

Kirby64 wrote: post #72
ryandrake wrote: post #70

> But I shouldn't have had to do any of this. It's time cables came with a label of their own, or some sort of color coding. There shouldn't even need to be a label. A USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable. There should be a single connectivity/performance spec, and if the cable meets it, it can be called a USB-C cable, and if it doesn't, it should have to be marketed as USB-JUNK or something. T…

Unless you want all cables to be thick, $60, and cap out at 1 meter long, this is not a reasonable standard. 480mbps USB-C is perfectly adequate for many applications. Likewise for 60W cables.

I have several 1m long TB4 cables (100W, video, 40Gbps) and they’re neither particularly thick nor were they anywhere close to $60.

The best you can get is TB5 (240W, up to 120 Gbps data transfer) and at 1m long they’re $32 or so from CableMatters. Those are admittedly somewhat thicker, but not stiff.

I wish there was a higher baseline data transfer mandated for usb-c. Sure, 40gbps isn’t needed for all cables, but is some piddly 5gbps too much to ask? We had usb 2.0 speeds back when CPUs just barely entered 1 GHz range, it’s practically ancient technology. Admittedly most people never transfer any data over usb, but with this logic we might as well have usb-c that does charging only. Being able to pick any cable and have 5 gbps baseline means that any usb-c cable is fundamentally usable, if slow. 480 mbps is… ugh.

I don’t have an issue with 60W being the baseline, it’s enough for most laptops and the average GaN charger is 65 W (or less) anyway.

Re: I stopped trusting USB-C cable labels and started testing them

#92

Post by TheTxT »

Gigachad wrote: post #62
aeroevan wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I managed to get a few and so far am impressed. They are definitely on the chunky side but that probably comes with the durability

My concern is stiffer cables are likely more likely to rip USB ports off the PCB. A lot of devices provide very little support to the USB port which is basically just hanging off pads on the PCB, so a stuff heavy cable could provide a lot more bending force to rip it off. Phones and macbooks have it done right where the outer portion of the port is built in to the device body, but most other devices don't do this.

They’re chunky, but very flexible. There’s basically no memory effect to them either, so they don’t try to curl up on their own.

Re: I stopped trusting USB-C cable labels and started testing them

#93

Post by Kirby64 »

revolvingthrow wrote: post #91
Kirby64 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you want all cables to be thick, $60, and cap out at 1 meter long, this is not a reasonable standard. 480mbps USB-C is perfectly adequate for many applications. Likewise for 60W cables.

I have several 1m long TB4 cables (100W, video, 40Gbps) and they’re neither particularly thick nor were they anywhere close to $60. The best you can get is TB5 (240W, up to 120 Gbps data transfer) and at 1m long they’re $32 or so from CableMatters. Those are admittedly somewhat thicker, but not stiff. I wish there was a higher baseline data transfer mandated for usb-c. Sure, 40gbps isn’t needed for all cables, but is…

> Sure, 40gbps isn’t needed for all cables, but is some piddly 5gbps too much to ask?

5gbps means you add 8 additional wires to every cable, and also would require that both devices on each side implement 5gbps PHYs for their USB (if you mandated it on devices too). It’s a large cost, especially when you’re talking about billions of cables.

Re: I stopped trusting USB-C cable labels and started testing them

#94

Post by 3RTB297 »

synack wrote: post #71

I came up with a color code based on the wiring: Red for Power Only, Blue for USB 2.0, Green for USB 3 (the ones with the extra pairs connected). I use paint pens to mark every cable I come across with this code. Generally speaking, only the Green ones have special PD emarker chips. It doesn't cover every possible configuration, but it's good enough for when I'm like "I need a USB cable" vs "I need a good USB cable"…

As much as the original author bemoans having to do the labeling themselves, 99% of people don't care or don't have such a mix of cables as to make it a challenge to find one to suit the task.

If you care, then care enough to do small, practical things for yourself. A little loop of tape. Paint marker. Even just sorting them into drawers/boxes/whatevers by type.

Re: I stopped trusting USB-C cable labels and started testing them

#95

Post by ryandrake »

Kirby64 wrote: post #85
ryandrake wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, call it USB-D or something, if one cable is significantly different (in purpose, performance, form factor) than another cable. Don't just call everything the same label, and let the non-technical buyer beware.

USB-A has many variants and we don’t call it a different connector. Heck, USB-B and micro USB both have 3.0 variants that are physically different and we don’t call them something different either. I don’t see the problem here. This is just semantics, especially when they aren’t even labeled period… people just see a cable and will try plugging it in.

The other USBs are no better TBH. I still remember USB Full Speed and USB High Speed. Do you remember, without looking it up, which one is faster? Same form factor, same physical connector.

Re: I stopped trusting USB-C cable labels and started testing them

#96

Post by mjmas »

palmotea wrote: post #83

I use one of these to check the wiring of the USB cables I get, especially if I'm getting a weird one. I've always been a little freaked out by the story of that Google employee who posted very trusted USB-C cable reviews to Amazon, then got his equipment fried by one that crossed the wires. https://www.tindie.com/products/bittradeone/usb-cable-checke... But when I care about performance, I just get a cable from Anke…

> green milk crates

Looks like https://makerworld.com/en/models/1515018-110x110mm-square-st...

Re: I stopped trusting USB-C cable labels and started testing them

#97

Post by fragmede »

stouset wrote: post #82
ryandrake wrote: post #70

> But I shouldn't have had to do any of this. It's time cables came with a label of their own, or some sort of color coding. There shouldn't even need to be a label. A USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable. There should be a single connectivity/performance spec, and if the cable meets it, it can be called a USB-C cable, and if it doesn't, it should have to be marketed as USB-JUNK or something. T…

> There shouldn't even need to be a label. A USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable. Then USB is forever frozen in time, unless we start using new connectors. This was the tradeoff we got when standardizing on one connector. The protocol versions change (USB, USB-PD, Thunderbolt), the cables that go between each connector change based on the needs of the spec they supports. But the connectors sta…

> just use whatever cable came with the device

the problem comes when the device and cable get separated, and the cable is "helpfully" organized into the bin with the rest of the USB-c cables.

Re: I stopped trusting USB-C cable labels and started testing them

#99

Post by ReactiveJelly »

stouset wrote: post #84
ryandrake wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, call it USB-D or something, if one cable is significantly different (in purpose, performance, form factor) than another cable. Don't just call everything the same label, and let the non-technical buyer beware.

Okay, great, it’s called USB-D. Is this a new connector? Or do we now need to resort to labeling cables and checking the label? Do we do this for every new version and combination of versions for USB? USB-PD? Thunderbolt? DisplayPort?

The computer / phone should auto-detect and tell you on-screen

Re: I stopped trusting USB-C cable labels and started testing them

#100

Post by heffer »

mjmas wrote: post #96
palmotea wrote: post #83

I use one of these to check the wiring of the USB cables I get, especially if I'm getting a weird one. I've always been a little freaked out by the story of that Google employee who posted very trusted USB-C cable reviews to Amazon, then got his equipment fried by one that crossed the wires. https://www.tindie.com/products/bittradeone/usb-cable-checke... But when I care about performance, I just get a cable from Anke…

> green milk crates Looks like https://makerworld.com/en/models/1515018-110x110mm-square-st...

More like https://www.printables.com/model/1148683-stacking-storage-ba...

No handles.

Post reply on HN