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

Google engineer finds USB Type-C cable that’s so bad it fried his Chromebook

arstechnica.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 93 posts

Re: Google engineer finds USB Type-C cable that’s so bad it fried his Chromebook

#41

Post by Arnt »

mikeash wrote: post #33
sergiotapia wrote: post #31

I thought type-c was supposed to be the end-all compatibility design. You buy any type-c and it works to spec. What gives?

What gives is that this was not actually a type C cable, but an evil, broken cable mislabeled as a USB-C cable.

Right... but two questions stick their head up and want answers:

First, USB outlets are supposed to have a bit of a fuse. Why was this upfuckage so spectacular?

Second, why do USB type C ports/cables have 24 pins if there are only 4 wires? I can understand having a couple of extra ones for type/orientation detection and a doubling to support reversion, but 24 is a lot.

Re: Google engineer finds USB Type-C cable that’s so bad it fried his Chromebook

#42

Post by dcherman »

esquivalience wrote: post #27
sharpneli wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He might have a case. It was sold as an USB cable but clearly it is not actually an USB cable. False advertisement if not anything else.

He may even have a case against Amazon directly, depending on the circumstances of listing.

Honestly, I don't think he'd need a case against Amazon for this. If the original company refuses to pony up and Amazon was made aware, I feel like they'd just do it since it would be good PR to help make it right since what he's doing is a huge service for Amazon's customers.

Re: Google engineer finds USB Type-C cable that’s so bad it fried his Chromebook

#43

Post by hagope »

coffeedrinker wrote: post #37
hagope wrote: post #22

I find my micro USB type-B connectors all eventually fail, and I've been combing through Amazon to find a reliable cable manufacturer, any suggestions?

Anker.

I like their charging products, but the cables have been failing at the connector...

Re: Google engineer finds USB Type-C cable that’s so bad it fried his Chromebook

#44

Post by lostgame »

josteink wrote: post #17
randallsquared wrote: post #11

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…

A power cable would be a passive component.

I've had several of Apple's little power charging blocks melt and burn on me.

I had a CRT monitor explode when I was a kid.

Just because stuff is getting smaller doesn't mean it's any more or less liable to break. You use electronics, you're taking a risk, and if you use off-brand, non-official components with other brands, well, hell, even if you're using the official brand apparently, you're playing with, well, not fire, but electricity, which is almost a cousin of fire? Heh.

Re: Google engineer finds USB Type-C cable that’s so bad it fried his Chromebook

#46

Post by Vendan »

Arnt wrote: post #41
mikeash wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What gives is that this was not actually a type C cable, but an evil, broken cable mislabeled as a USB-C cable.

Right... but two questions stick their head up and want answers: First, USB outlets are supposed to have a bit of a fuse. Why was this upfuckage so spectacular? Second, why do USB type C ports/cables have 24 pins if there are only 4 wires? I can understand having a couple of extra ones for type/orientation detection and a doubling to support reversion, but 24 is a lot.

well, usb type C is supposed to have at least 9 wires, if I recall correctly. This is not a valid type C cable, but it was being sold as one, which is part of the outrage. (aside from the "killing devices" bit)

Re: Google engineer finds USB Type-C cable that’s so bad it fried his Chromebook

#47

Post by lorenzhs »

coffeedrinker wrote: post #37
hagope wrote: post #22

I find my micro USB type-B connectors all eventually fail, and I've been combing through Amazon to find a reliable cable manufacturer, any suggestions?

Anker.

Yup, I've never had a problem with any of my Anker gear. Cables aren't as flimsy as most of the cheaper ones - they seem pretty sturdy - and their other stuff (I have a 5-port wall charger and a power bank) is top notch as well. I usually don't like advertising a brand like that, but they seem to be doing everything right so far and I'd buy it all again.

Re: Google engineer finds USB Type-C cable that’s so bad it fried his Chromebook

#48

Post by digi_owl »

gravypod wrote: post #18
skj wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The external power source was presumably a wall outlet, since he was testing its ability to charge.

Well that is an entirely different story. I thought that the cable was plugged into a phone and his chromebook (Just like parent). 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.

Best i understand, the guy involved works for Google on USB support in their software and hardware.

What got fried was a Chromebook Pixel. A Chromebook designed and sold by Google directly.

He has been using it and various test instruments to check up on A-to-C adapter cables, as they need to have a specific resistor in them to indicate their nature.

Re: Google engineer finds USB Type-C cable that’s so bad it fried his Chromebook

#49

Post by zyxley »

Arnt wrote: post #41
mikeash wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What gives is that this was not actually a type C cable, but an evil, broken cable mislabeled as a USB-C cable.

Right... but two questions stick their head up and want answers: First, USB outlets are supposed to have a bit of a fuse. Why was this upfuckage so spectacular? Second, why do USB type C ports/cables have 24 pins if there are only 4 wires? I can understand having a couple of extra ones for type/orientation detection and a doubling to support reversion, but 24 is a lot.

> Why was this upfuckage so spectacular?

Because it had power wired to ground. This would be incredibly absurd in ANY variety of powered cable.

This is not merely "noncompliant with spec", it's "actively dangerous because it could start a fire and kill somebody".

Re: Google engineer finds USB Type-C cable that’s so bad it fried his Chromebook

#50

Post by Bjartr »

hagope wrote: post #22

I find my micro USB type-B connectors all eventually fail, and I've been combing through Amazon to find a reliable cable manufacturer, any suggestions?

This is actually by design, kind of. Mini USB didn't have this problem with cable connectors because the complexity was in the jack. Unfortunately that meant that when a failure did occur it was on the divide and couldn't easily be fixed. Micro USB improved on that by shifting the complexity to the plug side. So the cable failing eventually is down to a lesser of two evils engineering tradeoff.
Post reply on HN