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

Teardown: A Generic 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub That Wasn't

goughlui.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 112 posts

Re: Teardown: A Generic 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub That Wasn't

#101

Post by [deleted] »

Hackbraten wrote: post #94
namero999 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because more is better. Seriously, the game they play is at this point ludicrous. I saw 18650 cell being advertised through the years as 2500mAh, to 3500mAh (still reasonable/credible), then suppliers started to one-up each other and you could see 5000mAh, 9000mAh, 9999mAh up to, I kid you not, 1.000.000mAh. If I had no clue, of course I would by the 1KAh single cell XD

I wonder when they're finally going to one-up each other with the 18650 model number itself? Make it 18660, 19650 or 18650000! Anecdote: back in 2004, a friend brought home a cheap digital audio player from her vacation to China. IIRC, it said on the front panel that it could play back MP3, MP4, and MP5.

[deleted]

Re: Teardown: A Generic 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub That Wasn't

#102

Post by pseudohadamard »

slipperybeluga wrote: post #50
muvlon wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've definitely realized this in a couple of markets: Buy cheap, get trash. Buy expensive, get expensive trash with better marketing. Working with power tools from various brands has made me realize they all cheap out in the same ways. Plastic gears where there used to be metal, undersized motor drivers that fry themselves under sustained load, trigger switches that start misbehaving or die completely after a few mon…

This wasn't the case 20 years ago. There was actually a good article on HN a few months ago showing how most of the brands are owned by one company that has ruined them all. Still a few good brands. Need to research https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48147665

Don't know the HN article but here's my own list:

AEG = TTI

Black and Decker = Stanley (Stanley Black&Decker, SBD)

Bosch = {}

Craftsman = Stanley

Dewalt = Stanley

Hikoki = Hitachi

Irwin = Stanley

Kango = TTI

Klein = {}

Lenox = Stanley

Makita = {}

Metabo = Hitachi

Milwaukee = TTI

Porter-Cable = Stanley

Ryobi = TTI

The empty-set ownership symbol {} means not owned by anyone else.

Re: Teardown: A Generic 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub That Wasn't

#104

Post by mark-r »

happosai wrote: post #66
low_tech_punk wrote: post #60

It's a classic scam. It is a 3.0 USB 7-Port Hub, not a 7-port USB 3.0 Hub. The number 3.0 is the model number of the hub, not the protocol.

Ah like the roller bearing manufacturer established in the town of Ball, so the company could be called BALL BEARING.

I heard a story long ago when it was Japan, not China who was the source of cheap garbage. The town of Usa, Japan got a lot of manufacturing so they could all say "MADE IN USA".

Re: Teardown: A Generic 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub That Wasn't

#105

Post by mark-r »

bArray wrote: post #9

I think this was somewhat predictable. The USB cable from the hub is too long, and it's not thick enough. USB3 can also kick off a decent amount of heat, it's not a good sign when the case is in plastic. If you're looking for a good USB3 hub, look for one with a short thick USB cable, metal chassis. If it has HDMI it's a good since because you're unlikely to pump that via USB2.

There's also absolutely no chance that a pure plastic box is going to have proper RF shielding. Good luck finding one with the regulatory marks that make it legal to sell.

Re: Teardown: A Generic 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub That Wasn't

#106

Post by hexagonwin »

mark-r wrote: post #104
happosai wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah like the roller bearing manufacturer established in the town of Ball, so the company could be called BALL BEARING.

I heard a story long ago when it was Japan, not China who was the source of cheap garbage. The town of Usa, Japan got a lot of manufacturing so they could all say "MADE IN USA".

funny, but it seems false. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/made-in-usa/

Re: Teardown: A Generic 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub That Wasn't

#107

Post by teo_zero »

teiferer wrote: post #100
bayindirh wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marketed as a USB 2.0 hub with a single USB 3.0 port? When I last looked, typing truth via keyboards were free and valuable at the same time.

Of course it's wrong. But then again, what did you expect? A high quality super reliable full USB 3.0 speed 7 port hub? For $5? That shouldn't pass anybody's smell test. There is a cost to things, and if the price seems too low then your alarm bells need to go off. (I don't get why I'm downvoted. Maybe I should have been clearer the first time around.)

> I don't get why I'm downvoted

Because your comment was addressing the author instead of the article itself. Tell-tale words are "you" and "people".

It would have been different if you said, for example, "I have developed a rule that if something is too cheap, it must be rubbish". See how this delivers your opinion without suggesting stupidity about the others who don't share it?

Re: Teardown: A Generic 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub That Wasn't

#108

Post by Tade0 »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #97
Tade0 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other day my bicycle light gave out, so I took it apart - was not the most expensive option, but also not the cheapest. It was advertised as having a 2600mAh battery, but when I opened it up, inside there was a 1700mAh cell. Also no sign of purported weatherproofing, as the lens was not even glued in. I have a 2000mAh cell in the same form factor (approximately 500Wh/l, so believable) on its way from China, which…

For whatever reason, the lies about specs are particularly egregious for lights. Slopmarts like Amazon and AliExpress happily advertise 50,000 lumen flashlights (which would probably melt after a few seconds if they actually operated at that level)

Indeed. This light is advertised as having a:

-2600mAh battery (9Wh)

-500 lumen light intensity

-5W LED

-4h battery life at constant illumination setting and this is the shortest time listed.

I now know that the battery is much smaller (6Wh) and 500lm is believable for a 5W LED but it's most certainly not this bright at any appreciable duty cycle. During those 4h it has to be pulling 1.5W at most.

It's funny how most of those parameters are not false per se, but at the same time create a false image of the device's capabilities.

Re: Teardown: A Generic 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub That Wasn't

#109

Post by mark-r »

hexagonwin wrote: post #106
mark-r wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard a story long ago when it was Japan, not China who was the source of cheap garbage. The town of Usa, Japan got a lot of manufacturing so they could all say "MADE IN USA".

funny, but it seems false. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/made-in-usa/

It was such an amusing story I never thought to double check it. I'm sure I first heard it before Snopes existed. Thanks.

Re: Teardown: A Generic 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub That Wasn't

#110

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

Hackbraten wrote: post #94
namero999 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because more is better. Seriously, the game they play is at this point ludicrous. I saw 18650 cell being advertised through the years as 2500mAh, to 3500mAh (still reasonable/credible), then suppliers started to one-up each other and you could see 5000mAh, 9000mAh, 9999mAh up to, I kid you not, 1.000.000mAh. If I had no clue, of course I would by the 1KAh single cell XD

I wonder when they're finally going to one-up each other with the 18650 model number itself? Make it 18660, 19650 or 18650000! Anecdote: back in 2004, a friend brought home a cheap digital audio player from her vacation to China. IIRC, it said on the front panel that it could play back MP3, MP4, and MP5.

That's a real thing, there: https://docs.fileformat.com/video/mp5/
Post reply on HN