7 ms·
It's still universal, that's why you can get a USB A to USB C cable that doesn't need any kind of chip in it. You're crazy if you think that 4-conductor rectan
by zer0t3ch 10y ago
It's still universal, that's why you can get a USB A to USB C cable that doesn't need any kind of chip in it.
You're crazy if you think that 4-conductor rectangular non-reversible connector was going to be the end-all be-all for USB forever. We had to upgrade eventually. Be thankful that this change is being relatively swift and reasonably future-proof. USB C should be good for quite a few more years.
- dgfgfdagasdfgfa 10y agoIf it's an upgrade, why are people still calling it "USB"? This isn't semver; people don't ask what version of the cable you have. I still don't understand the difference between USB-1 and USB-2 except I shouldn't charge over USB-1. I don't own any USB-3 peripherals, let alone USB-C. This is going to haunt technical support for literally decades.
- zer0t3ch 10y agoI just told you why: it's still universal. USBC is no less Universal than micro USB.
- kevin_thibedeau 10y ago> why are people still calling it "USB"? Because you can still run the USB 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, and 3.0 protocols over it
- dgfgfdagasdfgfa 10y agoThis may be true (and it's an important saving grace), but it's the ports and cables people interact with, NOT the protocol. I wish they had simply called it "ngSB" or something like that. People understand the need for converters; it's the branding that's terrible.
- JimmyAustin 10y agoCounterpoint: People call the USB ports on phones (micro/mini) USB, despite not being compatible with the full sized port.