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

381–390 of 511 posts

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

#381

Post by Macha »

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 may only have dealt with your own devices. Yes, VGA devices were much harder to accidentally unplug or become loose than HDMI. But they were often far more solidly connected than e.g. the mount on a video card, or the attachment of a laptop motherboard to it's case. So you would find components which had been messed up internally by the use of a VGA connector as a leverage point.

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

#382

Post by lutorm »

readams wrote: post #370
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.

One issue with USB-C is that dust gets packed into the female side. I've found it can be in there so tight that even after attempting to clean it, the dust remains. But going in with a sewing needle, rubbing alcohol, and really scraping you can fix the port.

Yes! Every time my phone's had a problem charging, the issue has been cleared by doing exactly this.

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

#383

Post by cesarb »

microtonal wrote: post #241
layer8 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PCs still come with half a dozen or more USB-A ports and only a single USB-C port (if you're lucky). Dongles, flash drives, webcams and the like are still prominently USB-A. Logitech's lineup is still mostly USB-A. I'm not sure that there will even be a full transition to USB-C, but if so, it will take quite a while.

I bought a new machine last week (Intel NUC 13 Extreme). It has three Type-C ports of which two are Thundebolt. We are slowly getting somewhere. Meanwhile my phones, displays, keyboards, all use Type-C connectors. Though some came with a USB-C to A converter. We are slowly getting there.

Counterpoint: I also bought a new machine, a couple of weeks ago (Optiplex 7010 Micro). It has six USB A ports, four of them USB 3 and two of them USB 2 only, with the option to add a single USB-C port (or instead an extra DP or HDMI or even VGA or serial port); if you add that option, that USB-C port (which has DP alt mode) can be used to power the computer (instead of using the barrel plug), which is nice.

Very high end devices might have more than a single USB-C port (which is probably your case, given the "extreme" in the name), and these ports might even be Thunderbolt or USB4, but that's still rare. In my opinion, we are still in the USB-C equivalent of the "only two USB 2 ports, if you want more get a PCI add-on card" phase we had in the serial/parallel/PS2 to USB migration back in the day.

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

#384

Post by 9991 »

gweinberg wrote: post #42
jacquesm wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you get it wrong 50% of the time let me substantially reduce that for you: logo goes 'up' for whatever the normal orientation of your device is. That should clear up 99% of the cases.

More like 55%. The usb ports on the bac of my machine are sideways, and the one on the top is backwards-ass wrong from what I would expect.

The motherboard has an "up" direction if you lay it out flat.

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

#385

Post by cesarb »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #286
dcow wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. If we designed everything around its “bodge together in a pinch factor” we wouldn’t have technology let alone industry. It’s just not realistic or practical to live in the past and I do not believe it would be oppressive to ask people who still have a use for type A to buy a $5 adapter. Also the type C connector retains the exact pins you need to use it in 2.0 mode, they’re just smaller. Literally all these adapt…

> ...people who still have a use for type A to buy a $5 adapter I have literally tens of devices with usb A to usb B/mini/micro etc. cables, and only a few that have usb C, and even most of those came with a usb A -> usb C cable. USB A is far from dead and should stay... I don't want to live in an "apple-like world", where you need an adapter for everything that should be included directly in the first place (lika an…

> And I already have to buy a serial (rs232) adapter, because they removed it for no real reason.

RS-232 is a pain, it's one of the few users of negative voltages on a PC (others being ISA cards and PCI cards; PCI Express finally removed the last negative voltage pin), and the input needs to be tolerant of any voltage between -25V and +25V. I can see why computer manufacturers would love to not have to deal with it anymore.

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

#386

Post by Tade0 »

saiya-jin wrote: post #362
arghwhat wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny you say that, I can tell from family experience that USB type A ports are quite fragile to a vertical tug as it breaks the internal plastic bar at its base so you're left with a hole full of floating copper pins. It of course requires more than a light tug, but less than you'd think. The USB-C housing is much more rigid than that of type A, so it should handle this much better. The thinner bar might also handle…

Can't comment on USB-C yet and obviously case point 1, but on my desktop tower (Fractal Design 6, so should be quality) I have for cca 5 years, the frontal USB-A connectors which are used most often, 2 out of 4 are already dead (I'd say maybe 500 insertions altogether, definitely not more). 1 is sort of in between, sometimes works, sometimes doesn't. I generally know very well how to take care of electronics and thos…

In my two previous laptops I insisted on having four USB ports because I anticipated that they would wear out eventually and wear out they did - electrically they work, but mechanically half of them barely hold the plug in.

Meanwhile I have a USB-C to USB-A multi-dongle to which I have connected my mouse and keyboard and I move the whole thing between the work and private laptop on a daily basis and despite that after three years only the plug part is showing signs of wear. The socket is fine.

Same goes for the charge port in my phone. Still works as advertised even though I went through a few cables in those six years since I bought it.

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

#387

Post by broast »

nottheengineer wrote: post #278
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…

I once bent the USB-C connector on a dell dock just because the cable is stiff and the bend from going below my desk put too much force on the connector. It still works, but has an angle now. If the cable wasn't permanently attached, having the wear parts on that side would be fine. The EU should definitely mandate that, I don't see any technical reasons for soldering one side of the cable.

I've ruined many usbc connectors like this and specifically dell dock connectors

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

#388

Post by naasking »

hurryer wrote: post #199
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…

Minimum is just that, minimum. Have you ever seen a broken standard USB port or connector? Me not once in my entire life, unlike micro-USB or USB-C.

> Have you ever seen a broken standard USB port or connector? Me not once in my entire life, unlike micro-USB or USB-C.

USB-A has failed just as often as Micro-USB in my experience. The only connector I haven't seen break is USB-B, but that could be due to fewer samples, since only printers seem to use that connector, and how often do you unplug/plug a printer?

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

#389

Post by blueflow »

aslilac wrote: post #3

calling USB A “legacy” and a “relic” is so misplaced. we all still own USB A devices. I challenge the author to go find a wired keyboard or mouse that comes with a USB C plug. it’s possible, but not easy. the thing is, we could just have both! this isn’t some winner/loser scenario. the real question should be why these computers with enough bandwidth for 11+ connectors don’t at least split the difference with 6/5 of…

> calling USB A “legacy” and a “relic” is so misplaced

Calling established technologies "legacy" and "relic" despite them being widely adopted and used should be recognized as the manipulative intellectual dishonesty that it is.

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

#390

Post by philistine »

nine_k wrote: post #272
dcow wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. If we designed everything around its “bodge together in a pinch factor” we wouldn’t have technology let alone industry. It’s just not realistic or practical to live in the past and I do not believe it would be oppressive to ask people who still have a use for type A to buy a $5 adapter. Also the type C connector retains the exact pins you need to use it in 2.0 mode, they’re just smaller. Literally all these adapt…

Still we live with power sockets and lamp sockets that hark back to Edison times, more than a century ago, and live relatively happily. Backwards compatibility with millions (and hundreds of millions) of existing devices is a powerful force. While I'm in favor of USB-C connector eventually replacing USB-A connector completely, I think it's best done gradually, with new devices still offering the occasional USB-A sock…

Yeah but I'd still argue PC manufacturers have it backwards. Offering 1 or 2 USB-C ports and 4 USB-A ports is the wrong ratio. The Mac Pro has it right: 2 USB-A ports in the front, one inside for software keys, and 8 Thunderbolt 4 ports for truly insane speeds impossible to achieve with an A plug.
Post reply on HN