4 ms·

Here's an idea, let's make different connector shapes depending on the cable/connector's capabilities, lets do one for connectors that support display, one for

Here's an idea, let's make different connector shapes depending on the cable/connector's capabilities, lets do one for connectors that support display, one for power, one for thunderbolt, that way they're easy for the average consumer to identify! Oh wait that's the issue USB was supposed to solve in the first place....

jsgo 8y ago
My hope is that Type-C is going to be all of those things so that in the future, I only need one kind of cable (until the inevitable new plug that supplants it, but hopefully universally used as well). Currently, I have to pay attention to a USB3 Type-C cable vs a Thunderbolt 3 cable as there is a difference (I was shopping for a long TB3 cable and was unable to find one. Instead, seems the longer ones tend to be USB3 Type-C cables).
- gumby 8y ago
  That's because TB has length restrictions slower USB protocols do not. Don't forget higher power PD cables (it can go up to 100 W!) should have higher gauge wires as well.
- jwr 8y ago
  This is not a realistic expectation, unless you are OK with your "one cable" being 0.5m long. The "one-cable" thing is a dream, unfortunately.
  - CharlesW 8y ago
    "Active Thunderbolt 3 cables support Thunderbolt at 40Gbps data transfer at lengths of up to 2m. Optical cables are targeted later, with lengths of up to 60m." https://blog.startech.com/post/thunderbolt-3-the-basics/ https://blog.startech.com/post/thunderbolt-3-the-basics/
    - izacus 8y ago
      They are, of course, significantly stupidly expensive and would cost more than many devices using USB as connecting protocol.
    - wongarsu 8y ago
      Of course the optical cable won't transfer 100W of power, so we're back to needing two types of cable (power delivery USB-C and non-power-delivery USB-C). I guess technically you could make a USB-C cable that transfers signals optically and has high-gauge wire for power, but that sounds unwieldly and expensive.
      - nybble41 8y ago
        > Of course the optical cable won't transfer 100W of power You sure about that? The optical cables will still have copper wires for power transfer. Only the high-speed data is carried over optical fiber. Eliminating electrical interference from the data path might even permit higher voltages, and thus thinner, more flexible wires for the same power.
  - wmf 8y ago
    And don't forget that the One Cable costs $40.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    As long as the only difference between cable capabilities is speed, I'm happy. We're not quite there but we're close. Also it would need to be marked on the cable somewhere.
- holy_city 8y ago
  This is one of those "it's a bug, not a feature" things. I don't mind having unified connectors so long as we have segregation between powered/unpowered connections at the cable level. It prevents faults by design. There's no reason that an unpowered device should have the same connector as a powered one, and quite a few reasons why it shouldn't.
- throwaway2048 8y ago
  Its not going to happen in the future either, There is never going to be a desktop motherboard that delivers full spec (100W) USB3 power delivery to say, 6 ports at once, or a laptop even capable of delivering to 1. The USB spec is too ambitious and its inevitable that some use cases are mutually incompatible.
crooked-v 8y ago
TB3 is already the "all of the above" cable, so hopefully USB4 will be as well.
- mortenjorck 8y ago
  The problem comes in practice: First, OEMs don’t bundle Thunderbolt cables with a device unless the device actually has a Thunderbolt controller onboard. Meanwhile, USB-C cables retail for $8 while Thunderbolt cables retail for $40. So the end result is that no one actually has “all of the above” cables, but rather a collection of cables with different, often invisible constraints. Maybe the move to free licensing will bring TB cables down to USB cable prices, but it remains to be seen.
  - humblebee 8y ago
    I like how this was solve for USB A/B connectors by color coding the inside. I'm curious why this wasn't brought over with USB-C, it seems like such a simple solution, though maybe there are just too many variations / combinations for it be of practical at all.

jsgo 8y ago

My hope is that Type-C is going to be all of those things so that in the future, I only need one kind of cable (until the inevitable new plug that supplants it, but hopefully universally used as well). Currently, I have to pay attention to a USB3 Type-C cable vs a Thunderbolt 3 cable as there is a difference (I was shopping for a long TB3 cable and was unable to find one. Instead, seems the longer ones tend to be USB3 Type-C cables).

gumby 8y ago
That's because TB has length restrictions slower USB protocols do not. Don't forget higher power PD cables (it can go up to 100 W!) should have higher gauge wires as well.
jwr 8y ago
This is not a realistic expectation, unless you are OK with your "one cable" being 0.5m long. The "one-cable" thing is a dream, unfortunately.
- CharlesW 8y ago
  "Active Thunderbolt 3 cables support Thunderbolt at 40Gbps data transfer at lengths of up to 2m. Optical cables are targeted later, with lengths of up to 60m." https://blog.startech.com/post/thunderbolt-3-the-basics/ https://blog.startech.com/post/thunderbolt-3-the-basics/
  - izacus 8y ago
    They are, of course, significantly stupidly expensive and would cost more than many devices using USB as connecting protocol.
  - wongarsu 8y ago
    Of course the optical cable won't transfer 100W of power, so we're back to needing two types of cable (power delivery USB-C and non-power-delivery USB-C). I guess technically you could make a USB-C cable that transfers signals optically and has high-gauge wire for power, but that sounds unwieldly and expensive.
    - nybble41 8y ago
      > Of course the optical cable won't transfer 100W of power You sure about that? The optical cables will still have copper wires for power transfer. Only the high-speed data is carried over optical fiber. Eliminating electrical interference from the data path might even permit higher voltages, and thus thinner, more flexible wires for the same power.
- wmf 8y ago
  And don't forget that the One Cable costs $40.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  As long as the only difference between cable capabilities is speed, I'm happy. We're not quite there but we're close. Also it would need to be marked on the cable somewhere.
holy_city 8y ago
This is one of those "it's a bug, not a feature" things. I don't mind having unified connectors so long as we have segregation between powered/unpowered connections at the cable level. It prevents faults by design. There's no reason that an unpowered device should have the same connector as a powered one, and quite a few reasons why it shouldn't.
throwaway2048 8y ago
Its not going to happen in the future either, There is never going to be a desktop motherboard that delivers full spec (100W) USB3 power delivery to say, 6 ports at once, or a laptop even capable of delivering to 1. The USB spec is too ambitious and its inevitable that some use cases are mutually incompatible.

crooked-v 8y ago

TB3 is already the "all of the above" cable, so hopefully USB4 will be as well.

mortenjorck 8y ago
The problem comes in practice: First, OEMs don’t bundle Thunderbolt cables with a device unless the device actually has a Thunderbolt controller onboard. Meanwhile, USB-C cables retail for $8 while Thunderbolt cables retail for $40. So the end result is that no one actually has “all of the above” cables, but rather a collection of cables with different, often invisible constraints. Maybe the move to free licensing will bring TB cables down to USB cable prices, but it remains to be seen.
- humblebee 8y ago
  I like how this was solve for USB A/B connectors by color coding the inside. I'm curious why this wasn't brought over with USB-C, it seems like such a simple solution, though maybe there are just too many variations / combinations for it be of practical at all.