3 ms·
> Of course, the first thing that comes to mind is what happens if better solutions are found. Will EU block innovation? Usb typec wire from 65A(non e-marked w
by mmis1000 4y ago
> Of course, the first thing that comes to mind is what happens if better solutions are found. Will EU block innovation?
Usb typec wire from 65A(non e-marked wire) to 240A(the latest standardized e-marked wire) uses literally the same plug.
Typec is the header but not the protocol. Even China phone vendor's proprietary high speed charging protocol use typec wire. And Intel's tb4 wire also use a type c wire. (the bandwidth of tb4 is definitely overkill for every phone ever made on the world for now)
Force use of typec header and baseline charging protocol prevent innovation is just bs consider this didn't even prevent apple from making a MFA e-marked typec cable.(Or they don't want this to pass because they actually want to do this again?)
- Dylan16807 4y ago> the bandwidth of tb4 is definitely overkill for every phone ever made on the world for now That depends on what you're doing with it. It would not be very strange to power a VR headset with a phone, which could easily get into that bandwidth range.
- kanetw 4y agoI'm considering TBT3/4 for our VR headset's tethered mode. It's a bit of a pain to implement, but the data rate is worth it. For reference, we need 2-4 lanes of DP HBR3 (depending on compression) + PCIe Gen3x4 for the camera passthrough. TBT3/4 could do it over a single cable. Feeds into the nightmare that is implementing that entire ecosystem though...