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

441–450 of 511 posts

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

#441

Post by Diffusion3166 »

LorenPechtel wrote: post #64
barrkel wrote: post #15

The big upgrade in USB-C for mobile devices is power delivery; a secondary benefit is video output for laptops, enabling docking using a single cable instead of an old-fashioned dock. PCs aren't in the power delivery game and don't really need an extra video output. Meanwhile, USB 3 over a USB A socket is still able to transfer 500 MB/sec of data - I just did this earlier today, copying from an old M2 SSD in an enclo…

USB C is easier to use. Machines should have more C ports even if they have to share controller lanes--rarely would anyone be in a situation to saturate the system but being able to have multiple devices plugged in at once is useful. I'd be perfectly happy with an internal USB C hub--but I have never seen such a thing. (I *do* have an internal USB 3 hub. Same issue--the convenience of multiple ports, I don't need the…

>USB C is easier to use.

Not in my experience. The last few times I went to try to use one of my USB-C peripherals it was a pain. For example I wanted to use my portable external monitor with my laptop. Both are "USB-C" however the issue is that USB-C describes the physical connector and not much else. I already new my laptop supported DisplayPort Alt Mode and I knew that was what the display was expecting (rather than being USB display adapter). However, I then ended up digging through the box of USB-C cables testing them until the third cable I tried lit the screen up. This was the general experience with my Thunderbolt M.2 interface as well. I don't have much that takes uses PD but as I understand that's yet another dimension of permutations.

Without intimate knowledge of both devices /and/ the cable it's hard to say what any combination of "USB-C" parts will do. Even OEMs fail to get this right. I friend recently told me of buying Dell laptops which offered a dock as an option. Unfortunately, the dock expected Thunderbolt & DP MST while the laptop only supported USB3.

My personal opinion is that the relative lack of USB-C in a highly competitive, consumer market like DIY Motherboards is likely because even after 10 years the consumer demand is just not there. When judged the more lofty aspirations of USB-C that are being expressed here (replacing most if not all USB-A, HDMI, DP, Thunderbolt, and lower wattage power cables), I consider USB-C to be a failure.

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

#442

Post by necovek »

linuxdude314 wrote: post #320
picture wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comparing technology to human lifetimes doesn't seem very relevant. Even not accounting for broad categories like "fire" or "language", we're still using individual technology from "long ago" like knives, forks, pen and paper, etc. It's fine to make improvements that keep backwards compatibility (more ergonomic scissor should be able to cut the same paper), but changing connector just because it's old is unwise. The…

Absurd comparison. It’s completely irrational to compare computer hardware is if it’s just some tool. If you don’t need the bandwidth, good for you. The rest of us choose modernity and nice things like, USB-C hard drives, network adapters, etc… USB-A is not a connector, it’s a whole spec. You can’t get the same performance out of that connector as you can a USB-C connector.

I haven't seen a USB-A port implementation that exceeds 10Gbps (3.2, was it?).

I just assumed there aren't enough lines/pins in a USB-A connector for it to work.

A quick search gives me https://www.tomshardware.com/news/usb-3-2-explained which supports that experience (USB-A is not listed under 20Gbps).

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

#443

Post by arcticbull »

throw555chip wrote: post #413
arcticbull wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

USB A was released in 1996, it's older than I suspect the majority of HN readers at this point. An A to C cable is entirely passive, so not exactly a big deal to get a cheap adapter. Not sure I'd rely on keyboards as the standard bearer for 'not a relic' many of them still support PS/2 via passive adapter. That was announced in 1987 and is older than me.

The wheel was invented before anyone living today yet it remains relevant.

Only because this is living rent-free in my head - a good wheel analogy would be Type C is rubber wheels and Type A is wooden wheels. Compatible, but nobody uses wood anymore.

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

#444

Post by libraryatnight »

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.

No matter how much I baby USB-C connectors on phones, I eventually end up in a place where I'm wiggling the cable to get it to pick up that it's plugged in to charge - usually around the time i start looking for a new phone.

I'd like a Framework style swappable USB charging port already.

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

#446

Post by dcow »

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…

The type C port is superior to and entirely backwards compatible with, the type A port. For your 10s of devices with type A, just get one of these: 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub with 19.7 Inch Cable, ORICO Ultra-Slim Data USB Splitter https://a.co/d/aRru1K1

It’s way better than plugging every device into the back of your PC anyway.

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

#447

Post by dcow »

jojobas wrote: post #283
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…

I still have plenty USB-A/B devices and I'd rather not buy a new cable for each of them. Ain't broke, don't fix it. They will fade away eventually.

You don’t have to but a new cable for each one. 7-Port USB 3.0 Hub: https://a.co/d/aRru1K1

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

#448

Post by lxgr »

holoduke wrote: post #227
kayfox wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The connector lifetimes are tested by some manufacturers. When I was working on USB (electrical) testing at Microsoft we had test jigs for testing connectors to failure and I can vouch for Microsoft's connectors having lifetimes exceeding 25,000 insertions. We would also test how many miles a mouse would travel before the glides would wear out.

How can a large usb A port be weaker than a tiny usb c port? If you attach a keyboard and throw it out of the window the usb A port will remain ok whereas the usb c port instantly gets damaged.

> How can a large usb A port be weaker than a tiny usb c port?

Because for USB-A, the part that wears down is in the port, while for USB-C it's in the plug.

> If you attach a keyboard and throw it out of the window the usb A port will remain ok whereas the usb c port instantly gets damaged.

Have you tried that yourself, a statistically significant number of times?

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

#449

Post by neuromanser »

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…

> Fractal Design 6, so should be quality

Side note: I too wish this brand guaranteed quality. I have two Fractal Design cases, a Define R6 and an Era. The former is quite good, the latter is crap - panels don't fit. Btw, they cost the same (fucking expensive).

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

#450

Post by lxgr »

Roark66 wrote: post #245
wannacboatmovie wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I think these numbers are fabricated horseshit, drafted by some engineer behind a desk running endless simulations. The USB industrial complex made the same claims with micro-USB vs mini-USB; and are now doing it again with Type-C. My empirical evidence: I've now had to replace two laptop motherboards due to a (mechanically) failed USB-C port. Guess what I haven't had to do in 25 years? Replace a failed US…

Exactly. There is no way a significantly smaller connector with way more pins can be as robust as a large one with less pins. It is 100% horseshit. My anecdote to add, but this time comparing USB-c power delivery with the lowly ~8mm barrel jack. I recently got a laptop shipped to me by a remote client to use to connect to their network. I pull it out of the box set it up and I notice the usb c power cable has the sli…

> And if it didn't work I could get another barrel jack from an electronic parts store the same day, chop off the old one and solder the new one on. Good luck doing that with usb-c.

Most consumers can't solder, and I wouldn't even know where to find an electronic parts store. I can buy a (probably bad, but better than nothing in a pinch) USB-C cable at a convenience store on almost every street corner.

I'm more than happy to never have to deal with barrel jacks anymore. The inevitable drawer full of incompatible (at best) or physically compatible, but electrically mismatching barrel jack chargers has plagued too many households.

> I decided to try anyway and the laptop that needs 120W psu wouldn't even boot with the 90w PSU. I thought maybe it would throttle down the components. Nope, a bios message said, unplug it or else.

Seems like Dell does not care a lot about compatibility then. This is entirely allowed by the spec for good reasons: The alternative would be more barrel jacks, and at least I can use a Dell charger for my phone or laptop.

It's definitely not the norm – my laptops charge even from a 5W USB-C charger (albeit very, very slowly).

> So yes, I agree the magnificent claims of usb c resolving all sorts of problems are all horseshit.

I can definitely see how it doesn't solve all the problems all people have had with connectors, but it's solved all sorts of problems at least for me. I really like it.

Post reply on HN