3 ms·

Having a barrel charging port is a serious flaw. I have many devices, but I expect to carry a single charger for all of them; if my laptop has a non-USB-C charg

Having a barrel charging port is a serious flaw. I have many devices, but I expect to carry a single charger for all of them; if my laptop has a non-USB-C charger than I need a separate charger for the headphones/phone/Kindle/etc which is extra weight to carry around, extra mess and e-waste. The world has moved to a single standard for charging for all devices, we're just waiting for the "transition period" to run out as the devices with nonstandard charging expire, it's inappropriate to design new hardware with an obsolete charging approach.

kragen 5y ago
Barrel charging ports provide a superior user experience: they are easier to use because you can insert the charger at any angle. Barrel connectors are physically much more robust: they can rotate around their axis without imposing any torsional stress on the device being charged, and the longer lever arm inside the charging device (typically 15 mm) means that flexural stress around other axes creates much less force on the connector. Consequently, they break much less often than pre-C micro-USB connectors. It's too early to tell whether USB-C will improve on its predecessors in this regard, and it may, but it seems unlikely to reach barrel-connector levels of reliability just based on its geometry. Barrel-connector ports are easier to repair when they break: there are only two wires, and they are quite thick. This is true a fortiori for the cables. Barrel-connector charger faults are easier to diagnose: either the voltmeter tells you it's outputting 19 volts open circuit (or whatever the rated voltage is), or it's not, or, rarely, it has the correct open-circuit voltage but sags under load, the diagnosis of which requires a voltmeter and a power resistor. Moreover, they are less likely to occur; you are not going to break a bipolar SMPS with static electricity, not even if it is attached to a 5-volt USB cable, but you can easily do that to the CMOS control chips necessary for USB-C voltage negotiation. Barrel connectors pose less of a security risk: they do not, in most cases, have a data connection at all, and a malicious charger definitely cannot execute a firmware upgrade attack on your device through a barrel connector. Against this list of technical advantages you claim that barrel charging ports are "nonstandard" and "obsolete" — not because of any actual USB-C functionality, nor even because there are more USB-C-chargeable devices in the world than devices with barrel connectors, but just because USB-C is newer and currently fashionable. The maximally charitable interpretation of your post is that USB-C chargers are capable of providing a range of different voltages, so the complexity of voltage conversion goes into the charger instead of your headphones. But that's an extremely weak argument; a buck converter capable of deriving 5 V 300 mA from, say, 19 V is already much smaller, lighter, and cheaper than a pair of wireless headphones, and adding USB-C charging support to your product also requires a significant BOM cost, and the necessity to operate on 5 V as well as whatever it prefers, though maybe less weight than the buck. What's inappropriate is that you're attempting to dictate decisions of technical functionality on the grounds of mere fashion and social approval, then shaming others for disagreeing with your judgment rather than supporting it by any actual arguments. I predict that >99% of devices made this year that can only charge through USB-C ports will be nonfunctional in 15 years. That is, they are cheap trash, designed to be discarded rather than repaired. You should be ashamed of yourself for attacking my social standing to convince people to accept this inferior technology. The form of your argument — a veiled personal attack — makes it unworthy of being posted on this site, or, actually, anywhere.
stragies 5y ago
I like it, when both USBC charging, and BarrelJackCharging are available. So I can use the BarrelJackAdapter at home for when in "DeskMode", and only need to travel with the USB-C charger, that can also charge all my other devices. Also makes for the possibility of "Redundant Power Supply", in case you use your old Laptop as a "HomeServer".
- wildrhythms 5y ago
  I don't understand; why not use USB-C at home too? It has enough power. At best, the barrel charger is just more e-waste for a landfill.
  - Mister_Snuggles 5y ago
    Yeah, I'd actually use the barrel charger on the road so that it can just live in my backpack and USB-C (provided by an appropriate dock that's connected to a keyboard, monitor, etc) at home.
  - stragies 5y ago
    Depending on what/where/how I hook up in DeskMode, I also have Power on USB-C. Mainly depends on how/where I want to route DP/HDMI-output. Also, POE-to-BarrelJack is a thing, while POE-to-USB-C-with-more-than-5V is not.
  - efreak 5y ago
    The simpler device is cheaper as less likely to break. A barrel charger is far simpler than a USB charger and cable.
- yencabulator 5y ago
  > Also makes for the possibility of "Redundant Power Supply", in case you use your old Laptop as a "HomeServer". Most laptops with multiple USB-C ports should be able to charge from any port.
kragen 5y ago
[flagged]
- NavinF 5y ago
  Link broken. Remove the semicolon. > my experience with USB charging ports is that they always break, and then they're a huge pain to fix, and my experience with barrel charging ports is that they almost never break, and then fixing them is pretty easy The opposite for me. I’ve broken a proprietary charge port and had to wait over a week for the replacement. Never broke a USB-C port, but if I did it’d be no big deal since I have plenty of C connectors in my cabinet. I can solder a replacement in 10 minutes. > So I think of a computer that can only be charged via USB as a piece of cheap trash. Maybe USB-C is different on this axis Wait are you saying you’ve owned a laptop that charges over USB, but not USB-C? If so that laptop really was cheap trash. Why compare trash with flagship products?
  - stormbrew 5y ago
    USB-A (or quasi-USB-A) charge ports on laptops were a weird abberation for a while. I had a dell with that, and it's now one of the few laptops I've got that I might never be able to power on properly again because the power delivery over the port is 100% proprietary and the AC adapter for it is busted. I don't think there's ever been a high wattage PD standard for USB-A? Even with USB3. So any version of it was just some manufacturer's attempt to jump the gate on PD over USB-C. USB-C is a completely different ballgame here. It has its flaws but it's nothing at all like that weird little era of laptops.
  - kragen 5y ago
    I've owned many computers that charge over USB but not USB-C. They're cellphones, though, not laptops. I'm sorry to hear about your experience with a proprietary charging port.
spuz 5y ago
This laptop also has USB-C charging.

kragen 5y ago

Barrel charging ports provide a superior user experience: they are easier to use because you can insert the charger at any angle. Barrel connectors are physically much more robust: they can rotate around their axis without imposing any torsional stress on the device being charged, and the longer lever arm inside the charging device (typically 15 mm) means that flexural stress around other axes creates much less force on the connector. Consequently, they break much less often than pre-C micro-USB connectors. It's too early to tell whether USB-C will improve on its predecessors in this regard, and it may, but it seems unlikely to reach barrel-connector levels of reliability just based on its geometry. Barrel-connector ports are easier to repair when they break: there are only two wires, and they are quite thick. This is true a fortiori for the cables. Barrel-connector charger faults are easier to diagnose: either the voltmeter tells you it's outputting 19 volts open circuit (or whatever the rated voltage is), or it's not, or, rarely, it has the correct open-circuit voltage but sags under load, the diagnosis of which requires a voltmeter and a power resistor. Moreover, they are less likely to occur; you are not going to break a bipolar SMPS with static electricity, not even if it is attached to a 5-volt USB cable, but you can easily do that to the CMOS control chips necessary for USB-C voltage negotiation. Barrel connectors pose less of a security risk: they do not, in most cases, have a data connection at all, and a malicious charger definitely cannot execute a firmware upgrade attack on your device through a barrel connector. Against this list of technical advantages you claim that barrel charging ports are "nonstandard" and "obsolete" — not because of any actual USB-C functionality, nor even because there are more USB-C-chargeable devices in the world than devices with barrel connectors, but just because USB-C is newer and currently fashionable. The maximally charitable interpretation of your post is that USB-C chargers are capable of providing a range of different voltages, so the complexity of voltage conversion goes into the charger instead of your headphones. But that's an extremely weak argument; a buck converter capable of deriving 5 V 300 mA from, say, 19 V is already much smaller, lighter, and cheaper than a pair of wireless headphones, and adding USB-C charging support to your product also requires a significant BOM cost, and the necessity to operate on 5 V as well as whatever it prefers, though maybe less weight than the buck. What's inappropriate is that you're attempting to dictate decisions of technical functionality on the grounds of mere fashion and social approval, then shaming others for disagreeing with your judgment rather than supporting it by any actual arguments. I predict that >99% of devices made this year that can only charge through USB-C ports will be nonfunctional in 15 years. That is, they are cheap trash, designed to be discarded rather than repaired. You should be ashamed of yourself for attacking my social standing to convince people to accept this inferior technology. The form of your argument — a veiled personal attack — makes it unworthy of being posted on this site, or, actually, anywhere.

stragies 5y ago

I like it, when both USBC charging, and BarrelJackCharging are available. So I can use the BarrelJackAdapter at home for when in "DeskMode", and only need to travel with the USB-C charger, that can also charge all my other devices. Also makes for the possibility of "Redundant Power Supply", in case you use your old Laptop as a "HomeServer".

wildrhythms 5y ago
I don't understand; why not use USB-C at home too? It has enough power. At best, the barrel charger is just more e-waste for a landfill.
- Mister_Snuggles 5y ago
  Yeah, I'd actually use the barrel charger on the road so that it can just live in my backpack and USB-C (provided by an appropriate dock that's connected to a keyboard, monitor, etc) at home.
- stragies 5y ago
  Depending on what/where/how I hook up in DeskMode, I also have Power on USB-C. Mainly depends on how/where I want to route DP/HDMI-output. Also, POE-to-BarrelJack is a thing, while POE-to-USB-C-with-more-than-5V is not.
- efreak 5y ago
  The simpler device is cheaper as less likely to break. A barrel charger is far simpler than a USB charger and cable.
yencabulator 5y ago
> Also makes for the possibility of "Redundant Power Supply", in case you use your old Laptop as a "HomeServer". Most laptops with multiple USB-C ports should be able to charge from any port.

kragen 5y ago

[flagged]

NavinF 5y ago
Link broken. Remove the semicolon. > my experience with USB charging ports is that they always break, and then they're a huge pain to fix, and my experience with barrel charging ports is that they almost never break, and then fixing them is pretty easy The opposite for me. I’ve broken a proprietary charge port and had to wait over a week for the replacement. Never broke a USB-C port, but if I did it’d be no big deal since I have plenty of C connectors in my cabinet. I can solder a replacement in 10 minutes. > So I think of a computer that can only be charged via USB as a piece of cheap trash. Maybe USB-C is different on this axis Wait are you saying you’ve owned a laptop that charges over USB, but not USB-C? If so that laptop really was cheap trash. Why compare trash with flagship products?
- stormbrew 5y ago
  USB-A (or quasi-USB-A) charge ports on laptops were a weird abberation for a while. I had a dell with that, and it's now one of the few laptops I've got that I might never be able to power on properly again because the power delivery over the port is 100% proprietary and the AC adapter for it is busted. I don't think there's ever been a high wattage PD standard for USB-A? Even with USB3. So any version of it was just some manufacturer's attempt to jump the gate on PD over USB-C. USB-C is a completely different ballgame here. It has its flaws but it's nothing at all like that weird little era of laptops.
- kragen 5y ago
  I've owned many computers that charge over USB but not USB-C. They're cellphones, though, not laptops. I'm sorry to hear about your experience with a proprietary charging port.

spuz 5y ago

This laptop also has USB-C charging.