3 ms·
USB-C is highly extensible (some would say way too much), I doubt we will need to make a connector that is physically incompatible anytime soon (although I'm su
by marticode 4y ago
USB-C is highly extensible (some would say way too much), I doubt we will need to make a connector that is physically incompatible anytime soon (although I'm sure the standard will be upgraded for more speed/uses)
- rootusrootus 4y ago> I doubt we will need to make a connector that is physically incompatible anytime soon Didn't USB-C already do that to itself? I suppose that depends on how narrow the definition of "physically incompatible" is. But IIRC you can't buy a perfect do-everything USB-C cable today, because some USB-C use cases are flat out incompatible with others.
- matthewmacleod 4y agoYou can – AFAIK a real Thunderbolt 4 cable will carry anything that can be carried over a USB-C port.
- cesarb 4y agoAt the cost of being shorter and stiffer; a cable which can only use USB 2.0 and 3A charging can be longer and thinner. And there are also buggy devices (like the first hardware revision of the Raspberry Pi 4) which incorrectly short the two configuration pins together and can only work with less capable cables. But other than that, I agree: a passive Thunderbolt 4 cable can be considered a "perfect do-everything USB-C cable".
- xeromal 4y agoI believe those are just shitty implementations of the spec. If you buy high quality gear with high quality specs, it should work ok. The Nintendo switch is a pile of shit though.