7 ms·

> It should be impossible for any set of non-damaged, non-defective, spec-compliant set of USB-C cables and peripherals to cause fires. That is a fairly signif

by II2II 5y ago

> It should be impossible for any set of non-damaged, non-defective, spec-compliant set of USB-C cables and peripherals to cause fires. That is a fairly significant list of conditions. As an example, I have encountered significant heating in a damaged power cable on the original power supply of a laptop from a reputable vendor. It's easy to argue the owner should immediately replace the damaged power supply, yet many people will continue to use problematic hardware until it no longer functions. It is also the case that many companies will manufacture components down to a price (or, in the case of this vendor, for aesthetics) rather than make something that is robust. I find it a bit disconcerting that we're talking about delivering 240 W over a cable that consumers are unlikely to differentiate from a 15 W cable (i.e. USB-C specification) or even from a 2.5 W cable (e.g a USB cable they would have used fifteen years ago).

iainmerrick 5y ago
I find it a bit disconcerting that we're talking about delivering 240 W over a cable that consumers are unlikely to differentiate from a 15 W cable (i.e. USB-C specification) or even from a 2.5 W cable (e.g a USB cable they would have used fifteen years ago). Yes, exactly! It’s foolhardy. And maybe unnecessary -- haven’t Apple just shown that you can get amazing performance with very low power requirements? And shouldn’t we all be trying to minimize power usage, to try to reduce CO2 emissions, mining of rare and toxic elements, plastic waste, etc etc etc?
- lovemenot 5y ago
  What you say about efficiency is right, but it's complicated. There are many domestic devices on 110 / 220v AC using less than 250W. They are native DC, but source AC because they must. These devices are not likely to go away soon. In fact they'll proliferate so long as the developing world is still developing. We can also expect proliferation of domestic battery and solar: both DC sources. A standardised domestic micro-grid of DC sources and consuming devices could be a boon to efficiency and reduction of single-purpose conversion devices such as power bricks and inverters. As an example, every type of e-bicycle currently has a different proprietary adapter. Just as mobile phones once did. Most e-bikes charge at around 40v. With 250W USB available we will likely see a switch to USB by e-bile manufacturers, resulting in more common lower cost equipment and better interoperability.
  - dTal 5y ago
    It's a sensible vision, but USB-C is absolutely the wrong tech for it (which, from experience, means it's the tech that will get adopted). The connectors are fiddly and expensive and fragile and unreliable and require a bunch of silicon logic to work. You can't mess about with power delivery stuff, it needs to be robust and cheap. A domestic DC power plug standard should have a single voltage standard, three pins (+,-,G), and be able to tolerate being stepped on without causing shorts.
    - lovemenot 5y ago
      I don't doubt you are technically right. USB-C is presumably not the final word in USB connectors. Let's hope for both vision and better implementation. What's wrong with having multiple set voltages? If it's the necessity of semiconductors, is that really so terrible in this day and age? On a separate note, I hope they'd have properly managed EMI in this standard. USB has so many makers of varying quality, I can imagine cheap, badly-shielded cables and connectors playing merry hell with noise.
Dylan16807 5y ago
> That is a fairly significant list of conditions. It is, but it's a list of things that could fail even if there was only one kind of cable. The added risk from having a bunch of different kinds of cable with varying capability is quite small. > I find it a bit disconcerting that we're talking about delivering 240 W over a cable that consumers are unlikely to differentiate from a 15 W cable (i.e. USB-C specification) or even from a 2.5 W cable (e.g a USB cable they would have used fifteen years ago). All these voltages are low enough that you can expect any cable to support them. What really matters is the amps, and the difference is much smaller there. Specially marked cables support 5 amps. All other USB C cables support 3 amps. Old USB cables will vary, but it's been standard fare to push 2.4 amps over them for a long time.
hyperdimension 5y ago
> a laptop from a reputable vendor Why are comments here always so deliberately vague? I'd like to know which manufacturer. It seems like an important detail.

by II2II 5y ago

iainmerrick 5y ago

I find it a bit disconcerting that we're talking about delivering 240 W over a cable that consumers are unlikely to differentiate from a 15 W cable (i.e. USB-C specification) or even from a 2.5 W cable (e.g a USB cable they would have used fifteen years ago). Yes, exactly! It’s foolhardy. And maybe unnecessary -- haven’t Apple just shown that you can get amazing performance with very low power requirements? And shouldn’t we all be trying to minimize power usage, to try to reduce CO2 emissions, mining of rare and toxic elements, plastic waste, etc etc etc?

lovemenot 5y ago
What you say about efficiency is right, but it's complicated. There are many domestic devices on 110 / 220v AC using less than 250W. They are native DC, but source AC because they must. These devices are not likely to go away soon. In fact they'll proliferate so long as the developing world is still developing. We can also expect proliferation of domestic battery and solar: both DC sources. A standardised domestic micro-grid of DC sources and consuming devices could be a boon to efficiency and reduction of single-purpose conversion devices such as power bricks and inverters. As an example, every type of e-bicycle currently has a different proprietary adapter. Just as mobile phones once did. Most e-bikes charge at around 40v. With 250W USB available we will likely see a switch to USB by e-bile manufacturers, resulting in more common lower cost equipment and better interoperability.
- dTal 5y ago
  It's a sensible vision, but USB-C is absolutely the wrong tech for it (which, from experience, means it's the tech that will get adopted). The connectors are fiddly and expensive and fragile and unreliable and require a bunch of silicon logic to work. You can't mess about with power delivery stuff, it needs to be robust and cheap. A domestic DC power plug standard should have a single voltage standard, three pins (+,-,G), and be able to tolerate being stepped on without causing shorts.
  - lovemenot 5y ago
    I don't doubt you are technically right. USB-C is presumably not the final word in USB connectors. Let's hope for both vision and better implementation. What's wrong with having multiple set voltages? If it's the necessity of semiconductors, is that really so terrible in this day and age? On a separate note, I hope they'd have properly managed EMI in this standard. USB has so many makers of varying quality, I can imagine cheap, badly-shielded cables and connectors playing merry hell with noise.

Dylan16807 5y ago

> That is a fairly significant list of conditions. It is, but it's a list of things that could fail even if there was only one kind of cable. The added risk from having a bunch of different kinds of cable with varying capability is quite small. > I find it a bit disconcerting that we're talking about delivering 240 W over a cable that consumers are unlikely to differentiate from a 15 W cable (i.e. USB-C specification) or even from a 2.5 W cable (e.g a USB cable they would have used fifteen years ago). All these voltages are low enough that you can expect any cable to support them. What really matters is the amps, and the difference is much smaller there. Specially marked cables support 5 amps. All other USB C cables support 3 amps. Old USB cables will vary, but it's been standard fare to push 2.4 amps over them for a long time.

hyperdimension 5y ago

> a laptop from a reputable vendor Why are comments here always so deliberately vague? I'd like to know which manufacturer. It seems like an important detail.