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

471–480 of 544 posts

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

#471

Post by klysm »

crote wrote: post #439
klysm wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t always want the shield coupled to the signal ground. If it’s coupled on both sides then you can have all kinds of fun problems. Ideally, the shield should be connected to the ground on one end

> Ideally, the shield should be connected to the ground on one end Depends on the signal. With low-frequency stuff (like audio) you want to ground the shield on one side to avoid ground loops, but with high-frequency stuff (USB 3, for example) you definitely want to ground the shield on both sides: if you don't, you end up creating an antenna which is really bad for your EMI performance. USB 1.x happens to be at an i…

That goes against all the guidance I’ve read, but I’m an amateur so you may be right. I’m confused on why it relates to signal speed though. For instance, I’ve read that this guidance also applies to Ethernet which is quite high frequency and based on differential pairs

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

#472

Post by opan »

ruined wrote: post #98
opan wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One problem with HDMI is that it has no clips or screws or similar holding it in, unlike DP, DVI, VGA, BNC... I remember I used to knock the HDMI out of one of my monitors with my foot all the time. It plugged in going straight up and barely could resist a bit more force than gravity, and the cable dangled behind the desk since the tower was on the floor.

the correct solution there is to manage your cables. yanking your monitor off the desk would not be an improvement

I don't think there's a realistic chance of that happening. The weight of the monitor would make it so that at most it shook a bit or something.

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

#473

Post by opan »

stavros wrote: post #53
opan wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One problem with HDMI is that it has no clips or screws or similar holding it in, unlike DP, DVI, VGA, BNC... I remember I used to knock the HDMI out of one of my monitors with my foot all the time. It plugged in going straight up and barely could resist a bit more force than gravity, and the cable dangled behind the desk since the tower was on the floor.

That has not been my experience with HDMI, I've never had a cable anywhere close to popping out because of gravity, no matter the orientation.

Yes, I hear this a lot, and it's not like it happens to me all the time these days, but it's a clear flaw in the design that there's nothing extra to hold it in like those other things.

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

#474

Post by jalapenos »

I don't know how, but the USB somehow managed to be worse than non-reversible.

The number of times I've flipped it around more than once to get it right is absurd.

It must look hilarious if you zoomed out to population scale. Thousands of people flipping around USBs at any given second.

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

#475

Post by zajio1am »

aranchelk wrote: post #164

My take on USB-A: aside from audio connectors that have axial symmetry (and have no meaningful orientation), I never used any reversible computer cables prior to USB-C, and that’s not the main issue. Nor is it the axis of symmetry of the casing allowing failed upside down plugin attempts. The shitty part of USB-A is that the tactile feedback of being slightly misaligned is identical to it being upside down. My experi…

> unscrew the two jammed retaining bolts holding in a serial, parallel, scsi, vga, or DVI

Yes, it was kind of annoying, but OTOH it provided reliable robustness. Today, many connectors are just too prone to unintentional disconnect. And in the case of optional locks, like e.g. on some DP cables, one never know if the cable has the lock or is just stuck.

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

#476

Post by korginator »

Rubbish. These are just excuses for terrible & thoughtless design.

USB is by far the worst designed thing in the history of humankind, in terms of the cumulative amount of frustration it has caused globally.

All common-sense usability principles were ignored, and these are not new principles. Take the old RS-232C or RJ45 jacks, you just looked at it and you knew which way to plug it in. Hell you could do it blindfolded by feel.

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

#477

Post by perilunar »

pseudosavant wrote: post #234

I think people really need to think about USB Type A in the context of the connectors it was 'competing' with: DSUB9 (VGA), RS-232 (serial), DB-25 (parallel), PS/2 (keyboard/mouse). These were, by modern standards, complete garbage connectors. Huge. Didn't stay plugged in securely unless the connector had screws. Only went one way. USB 1 stayed plugged in, required no screws, had higher bandwidth than any data port y…

> Audio jacks were the only ports that didn't have a direction back then.

On computers perhaps. There were plenty of round connectors in other uses though, e.g. Edison screw, Belling-Lee (TV/FM connectors), RCA, BNC, type C and type N RF, TOSLINK, etc.

Most of those wouldn't have been much use for a computer serial port though. Something like TOSLINK, with power and optic fibre would have been great. Too expensive at the time I think. But a round TRRP-style jack would have worked and been cheap.

Agree that USB-A was much better than the existing alternatives though.

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

#478

Post by avereveard »

aranchelk wrote: post #164

My take on USB-A: aside from audio connectors that have axial symmetry (and have no meaningful orientation), I never used any reversible computer cables prior to USB-C, and that’s not the main issue. Nor is it the axis of symmetry of the casing allowing failed upside down plugin attempts. The shitty part of USB-A is that the tactile feedback of being slightly misaligned is identical to it being upside down. My experi…

3.5 mm audio jack: I'm absolutely perfect

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

#479

Post by perilunar »

tommiegannert wrote: post #58

If we're not going back to circular slip-ring connectors that allow rotation (like TRS or DC plugs,) then the step after the +-90 -reversible USB-C is a triangular one. So you only need to rotate it +-30 if you got it wrong. Now I really want a triangular connector. Like in alien-tech movies.

What's wrong with circular? There's no wrong way to plug it in.
Post reply on HN