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

USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 544 posts

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#391

Post by oblio »

cyberax wrote: post #314
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is somewhat related as it's the next step of the above. The floating tongue of the USB connection is in the socket, not the on the cable. As in the most fragile part of the design is on the device side, not the cable side. This means that you can more easily break your $1000 device not the $2 cable. They repeated this mistake with USB-C as well. It's not hard to make a port where the cable is the free floating t…

That's incorrect. USB-C design maximizes the device longevity by removing springs from the device that typically get worn down quickly. The cable is responsible for the grip. You do get a protruding tongue on the device side, but it's well protected.

I broke mine on a S21. It's also getting wobbly on 2 Essential Phones.

As OP said, now those 3 expensive devices are mostly broken or at risk instead of the cheap cable. It's bad design compared to the Lightning connector, and I don't like Apple...

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#392

Post by macintux »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #74
lesuorac wrote: post #13

I know everybody is still on the high from USB-C but I'm still going to go on the record it will be one of the biggest disasters in cable history. 1) There's going to be video-only cables; low-voltage only cables; etc and this time everything is usb-c so you can literally only tell which ables work by testing all of the dozen cables instead of the 1-2 USB-As you have. 2) The connector is symmetrical but the pins aren…

I had to do a double take after reading this comment to make sure I wasn't reading an old thread from 2014 or something. USB-C has been out for years now and neither of these predictions have come to pass. Your comment aged poorly before you even finished writing it. USB-C isn't without its problems, but neither of those are one of them.

Data vs power-only is very much a problem. See this Daring Fireball note about an iPhone review: Becca Farsace plugged her iPhone into an external drive for shooting video, only to discover later that it was only useful for charging, and the recording was very low quality.

(This is something Apple should fix at the software level by alerting the user, but it highlights the problem that cables are not readily distinguishable.)

https://daringfireball.net/linked/2023/10/05/farsace-iphone-...

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#393

Post by skinner927 »

kccqzy wrote: post #113
Ajedi32 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK there's no such thing as a standards compliant USB-C male to USB-C female extension cable. The very concept goes against the spec[1]. You have a point though; I'm sure there are abominations out there that abuse the USB spec in all sorts of interesting ways, they just haven't been something I've encountered in my years of using USB-C for everything. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/UsbCHardware/comments/10xj74r/wh…

You can make a USB-C hub that has only a USB-C port.

Why buys a $5 cable when you can buy a $20 cable?

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#394

Post by shiroiuma »

nucleardog wrote: post #327
ianferrel wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have USB-C cables that look the same, but some of them carry video and some don't. I have USB-C charging devices that will charge off of some cables, but not off the one that will charge my laptop. I now have a box of weird crappy cheap USB-C cables with taped-on notes that say which toys they'll charge. I never had this problem with previous USBs. If the cable fit in the port, it would charge and transfer data. So…

Yeah, I don’t know how anyone can say this is not a problem. I’m sure there’s some deep technical reason why each cable does or doesn’t work, but as a user I have no idea why it’s the case or how I can figure out which cable will work where. I thought I was being smart ordering some decent Anker cables until I found out when trying to connect a display that they apparently they only support charging? And maybe USB 2.…

I have a Thunderbolt docking station for my laptop. There's no confusion about the cable, because the cable is permanently attached to the docking station. I just plug it into the laptop in the correct port (designated by the Thunderbolt logo).

Are other docking stations not like this?

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#396

Post by kortex »

nerpderp82 wrote: post #273
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The D-sub connectors were pretty intuitive, as far as I can remember. I never personally had a problem with them, but I can attest that people did. At my first job (a small computer shop), we had multiple customers who tried to jam their D-sub connector on wrong, and broke one or more pins off. Since this was back in the day when the cable was hard wired into the monitor, that generally meant they had to buy a new…

That is malicious, you cut off the d-sub connector and put another one on. I have never heard of someone replacing a monitor because the pins on the connector were damaged.

I did this once, it's not trivial. If you don't impedance match correctly, the colors get all wonky. It's a fairly specialized skill and more challenging than your typical solder job. Honestly easier to take the monitor apart and solder on a whole new cable.

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#397

Post by saratogacx »

cloudwalk9 wrote: post #182
parsimo2010 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another trick is that the USB standard says the USB logo should be facing up, so you should always try it first with the logo facing up. Not every device follows that standard and not every device has a clear top/bottom, but this really cuts down on the proportion of failed attempts.

The pattern on the aluminum of the plug is also helpful in cases of predictable slot orientation (like a laptop, except a Dell Latitude from back in the day that had upright connectors on the back unless I'm misremembering). The side without the seam down the middle and instead a tiny rectangular cutout center but slightly lower than the other two cutouts, should face up. In the dark, the seam can be felt by lightly…

The holes face up, like the eyes of a sole or flatfish.

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#398

Post by saratogacx »

stavros wrote: post #48
jawns wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that there was more that could have been done to signal correct orientation. But an additional wrinkle is that the orientation of the port itself was not static. On laptops and desktops, it was horizontal. On certain other devices, it was vertical. Often these ports were in hard-to-reach or hard-to-see places, and having to reconcile the orientation in each case probably added to the frustration.

Not really, HDMI ports are in weird orientation and mounted in hard-to-reach places as well, but the shape makes it very obvious (even by feel) which way it should (or can't) go. This is much harder with the rectangular USB plug.

I'll often use my phone and get a picture of the plugs on the device before I dive in with the cable. This is especially useful when working with gear I'd rather not have t0 move.

Re: USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible (2019)

#399

Post by kccqzy »

skinner927 wrote: post #393
kccqzy wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can make a USB-C hub that has only a USB-C port.

Why buys a $5 cable when you can buy a $20 cable?

What makes you think a USB hub shaped like a cable must necessarily be more expensive than a regular cable?
Post reply on HN