11–20 of 93 posts
Does anyone else find it concerning that our new and best technology is so fragile that even the slightest fezz-up in what should be a passive signal-cable can cause our otherwise state of the art equipment to fry itself? Is reliability, durability and robustness nowhere to be found in any single spec for our new standards?
Does anyone else find it concerning that our new and best technology is so fragile that even the slightest fezz-up in what should be a passive signal-cable can cause our otherwise state of the art equipment to fry itself? Is reliability, durability and robustness nowhere to be found in any single spec for our new standards?
Does anyone else find it concerning that our new and best technology is so fragile that even the slightest fezz-up in what should be a passive signal-cable can cause our otherwise state of the art equipment to fry itself? Is reliability, durability and robustness nowhere to be found in any single spec for our new standards?
No specification can defend against a hostile, or sufficiently incompetent, implementer.
I wonder if he will be able to recover any of his losses from this company? I know he is reviewing these cables, so hes taking a certain amount of risk, but imagine if someone bought this cable for their new device. I would be pretty pissed if I bought a new device and a new USB cord to charge it and poof out goes the magical smoke and my USB didn't work anymore.
Does anyone else find it concerning that our new and best technology is so fragile that even the slightest fezz-up in what should be a passive signal-cable can cause our otherwise state of the art equipment to fry itself? Is reliability, durability and robustness nowhere to be found in any single spec for our new standards?
> I directly analyzed the Surjtech cable using a Type-C breakout board and a multimeter, and it appears that they completely miswired the cable. The GND pin on the Type-A plug is tied to the Vbus pins on the Type-C plug. The Vbus pin on the Type-A plug is tied to GND on the Type-C plug.
Although I haven't read the spec, following the spec is a key part making use of a standard.
Does anyone else find it concerning that our new and best technology is so fragile that even the slightest fezz-up in what should be a passive signal-cable can cause our otherwise state of the art equipment to fry itself? Is reliability, durability and robustness nowhere to be found in any single spec for our new standards?
USB C is not a passive signal cable.
Yes, USB C can also be used to provide power (which is also a form of signal), but again my point is that a cable like this is largely expected to be a passive component.
That a crap charger can do bad things would probably surprise no one, but hooking a good charger up to a good unit shouldn't be able to fry anything, ever.
Wasn't USB C supposed to make our lives easier? If we need to ensure all our USB C gadgets, cables and chargers are all not-exploding certified, in parts and in combination, I may just go back to plain old regular USB.
Sounds strange. AFAIK USB shouldn't get fried without external power source. So the Chromebook was bad, not the cable? Down votes? Did I misunderstand something? Just comment with reference that I'm wrong and I'm very happy. Why bother building 'USB Killer' if simple paper clip would fry the motherboard?
The external power source was presumably a wall outlet, since he was testing its ability to charge.
I was concerned that this might be a flaw in the chrome book, not the cable. The USB bus should be fine to use such a cable, charging is another thing.
When you add the external power source, that completely changes the game.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
USB C is not a passive signal cable.
Tomay-to/tomay-to. Yes, USB C can also be used to provide power (which is also a form of signal), but again my point is that a cable like this is largely expected to be a passive component. That a crap charger can do bad things would probably surprise no one, but hooking a good charger up to a good unit shouldn't be able to fry anything, ever. Wasn't USB C supposed to make our lives easier? If we need to ensure all o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
USB C is not a passive signal cable.
Tomay-to/tomay-to. Yes, USB C can also be used to provide power (which is also a form of signal), but again my point is that a cable like this is largely expected to be a passive component. That a crap charger can do bad things would probably surprise no one, but hooking a good charger up to a good unit shouldn't be able to fry anything, ever. Wasn't USB C supposed to make our lives easier? If we need to ensure all o…
You can try it with your laptop. Cut the cable after the transformer, flip the ground and live wires and start it. It will get fried. Is this the fault of the specification or the person who intentionally flipped the wires?
The manufacturer was the person flipping the wires in this case.