4 ms·

If I'm making very little money, and I have equipment that requires a USB 3.1 charger, then it is even more important that my (expensive) equipment is not damag

If I'm making very little money, and I have equipment that requires a USB 3.1 charger, then it is even more important that my (expensive) equipment is not damaged - then, instead of being out an extra $7 for a charger, I've potentially lost many hundreds of dollars damaged by a out-of-spec charger/cable. This is a very real problem: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/02/google-engineer-finds-usb-type-c-cable-thats-so-bad-it-fried-his-chromebook-pixel/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/02/google-engineer-finds... This wasn't that big of a deal in the Pre 3.1 era, because the power levels typically being supplied were less, and there was a broad understanding of the power levels that were going to be supplied. You write, "Those people are going to look for cheap USB chargers, even if they are sub standard quality - and the market will fill that niche one way or the other." - and I totally agree with you, which is the entire reason why these certification programs are required - to ensure that only systems certified to be in-spec will be recognized. My 10 Watt USB charger, that I've carried with me all over the world for 2+ years, powers up my iPhone, my iPad, and my battery-backups. I use it every single day, usually multiple times/day. I realize that an extra $7 can be a lot of money for some people, but, spread over 2 years, for something so important, it seems to be a reasonable investment. It becomes an even bigger deal once you can also charge your laptop off the same charger.

nraynaud 11y ago
If they actually cared about energy quality and equipment protection, they would check and protect on electric criteria at the plug, not add an electronic signature.
- ghshephard 11y ago
  I don't know which, "they" you are referring to here - the end customer, the standards body, the charger manufacturer, or the manufacturer of the equipment being charged? The customer quite often just wants the cheapest price, the charger manufacturer doesn't care about anything other than selling lots of chargers, the two groups that do care, the Standard Body, and the manufacturers of the equipment being charged do care about energy quality and equipment protection. In the case of the manufacturer of the equipment being charged - you are right, they can take steps to protect their equipment, but it costs a bit of money to engineer a subsystem to detect a 100 watt charge and protect the upstream gear - likely cheaper just to query and confirm that the downstream device is certified and then trust it (somewhat). You still need the protection (defense in depth) - but starting off with certified chargers certainly helps. The standards body, really has every incentive to ensure that the only certified vendors can manufacture chargers that will be (broadly) accepted.
nraynaud 11y ago
If they actually cared about energy quality and equipment protection, they would check and protect on electric criteria at the plug, not add an electronic signature.
baq 11y ago
i'd gladly pay a bit more for a charger that does it all, except i want to not have a charger at all - i want a usb port in my AC socket. the best part about it is that i've already got some. i want them to keep working, as right now i don't need a charger sticking out of the socket at all and would like to keep it this way.
- adiabatty 11y ago
  Maybe I'm just used to living in older houses, but doesn't the thought of having your expensive phone plugged into the grid, without surge suppression, fill you with dread?

nraynaud 11y ago

If they actually cared about energy quality and equipment protection, they would check and protect on electric criteria at the plug, not add an electronic signature.

ghshephard 11y ago
I don't know which, "they" you are referring to here - the end customer, the standards body, the charger manufacturer, or the manufacturer of the equipment being charged? The customer quite often just wants the cheapest price, the charger manufacturer doesn't care about anything other than selling lots of chargers, the two groups that do care, the Standard Body, and the manufacturers of the equipment being charged do care about energy quality and equipment protection. In the case of the manufacturer of the equipment being charged - you are right, they can take steps to protect their equipment, but it costs a bit of money to engineer a subsystem to detect a 100 watt charge and protect the upstream gear - likely cheaper just to query and confirm that the downstream device is certified and then trust it (somewhat). You still need the protection (defense in depth) - but starting off with certified chargers certainly helps. The standards body, really has every incentive to ensure that the only certified vendors can manufacture chargers that will be (broadly) accepted.

nraynaud 11y ago

If they actually cared about energy quality and equipment protection, they would check and protect on electric criteria at the plug, not add an electronic signature.

baq 11y ago

i'd gladly pay a bit more for a charger that does it all, except i want to not have a charger at all - i want a usb port in my AC socket. the best part about it is that i've already got some. i want them to keep working, as right now i don't need a charger sticking out of the socket at all and would like to keep it this way.

adiabatty 11y ago
Maybe I'm just used to living in older houses, but doesn't the thought of having your expensive phone plugged into the grid, without surge suppression, fill you with dread?