8 ms·

I agree which is also why I’m very disappointed that the EU is forcing Apple into the absolutely horrible USB-C standard. People can buy android phones if they

I agree which is also why I’m very disappointed that the EU is forcing Apple into the absolutely horrible USB-C standard. People can buy android phones if they want to. Why remove choice?

Tuna-Fish 4y ago
How is USB-c horrible?
- scarface74 4y ago
  Before I standardized on the cables below, I had USB-C cables in my laptop bag that: - were power only up to 100W. But couldn’t do data. - could do power up to 60W and data at USB2 speeds. But they couldn’t do video over USB-C. I have a USB-C powered portable display that can do power and video directly from my laptop. - a USB-C cable that can do power, video, and data. But I’m still not sure how much data and power it can deliver. - a few smaller USB-C cables that came with my Beats headphones and my Anker battery. I don’t know what they can do. I finally threw away all of my cables besides my MagSafe cable and standardized on these for mobile devices (cheaper and not as thick). https://a.co/d/7e3gH9u https://a.co/d/7e3gH9u But these are truly “universal”. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B093YVRHMB https://www.amazon.com/dp/B093YVRHMB
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- strangemonad 4y ago
  The physical form factor of the “type C” connector is great but that a good example of how broken things are is that anyone can stick that type of connector on pretty much anything - might be usb 1, might just be power delivery, might be usb 3.2, might be real thunderbolt, might be thunderbolt-esque paie framed over usb 3.2 messages, this is before even getting into the wild world of hdmi 1.4 and display port over usb 3. This mess is assuming that the vendor implemented things correctly or is using a compliant controller chip, reality just gets even worse. A simplistic interpretation: Because the consortium wanted to get everyone on board, they allow pretty much any part of the spec to not be complied with. In theory there are various profiles the should be adopted but in practice that hasn’t happened. What happens when I plug in a c-type plug? You just can’t say… and I mean you REALLY just can’t say. Will high power delivery and hdmi work (I’m looking at you broken Nintendo switch usb-c implementation), will you get thunderbolt packets wrapped over usb 3.2? Will you even get high speed? Is the cable active or passive? Will this cable give me high speed data? Will this >3ft cable give me high speed charging or just silently stay at 5v and ~1amp because the resistance on the middle pin is too high on that particular cable. To placate many vendors who wanted to because to produce cheap crap and flood online stores, many parts of the spec do this all without active protocol handshaking and simply fail silently.
  - gruez 4y ago
    >The physical form factor of the “type C” connector is great At least for phone charging, I find it worse than lightning. It's way too loose (whereas lightning is snug), and I'm always worried about the plastic bit sticking out on the female side is going to break.
scarface74 4y ago
I wouldn’t go that far. While I don’t agree with the EU forcing the USB-C “standard”[sic] on private companies, it’s time for Lightning to die. Apple is already moving to USB C on iPads with only the low end iPad still being Lightning.
- cesarb 4y ago
  > the USB-C “standard”[sic] There's no reason for scare quotes, USB-C is an official standard. IEC 62680-1-3:2021 (https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/66588 https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/66588) is USB-C, and IEC 62680-1-2:2021 (https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/66589 https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/66589) is USB PD.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Okay, still the same thought experiment. Pick up a random USB C cable. Now tell me: How much power can it deliver? Does it support data and at what speed? Does it support video over USB C? If I bought a cheap USB power only 5W cable and got the hypothetical iPhone 15 Pro Max with USB C support that could charge faster with a 20W cable, do 10Gps data transfer and video over USB C, wouldn’t I still end up throwing away the USB C cable I got with the $100 Android phone contributing to eWaste? Isn’t that the entire argument about forcing Apple to support USB C? What happens when I buy a cheap USB C cord from the convenience store? Will it support “standard USB C”.
    - jsmith45 4y ago
      Yeah this all is a mess, but if we restrict ourselves to considering only conformant cables then the problem is at least tractable. All Type-C to Type-C support 60 W power delivery (3A at up to 20V), some support 100 W (5A at up to 20V) but those can no longer be certified, and the new 240W cables must have a certain logo on them that includes 240W clearly visible (and this means these cables can only be conformant if certified). And how much power a Type-C to Type-C cable can handle is completely orthogonal to the data it can transmit. USB does allow conforming passive cables that only have USB 2.0 lines, which can support any of the voltages. These can often be differentiated from the cables that support USB 3.x/USB4 by way of the cable being surprising thin, but this becomes harder if it supports more than the minimum 60W. Passive cables that support USB 3.x can vary in the maximum speed they support, which will also impact some alternate modes. If you want to ensure video support on a passive cable, your best option would be looking for a 0.8m or shorter passive cable that says 40Gbps, as those will all support the maximum currently allowed display-port bandwidth over type-c. [1] But all passive cables that include the USB 3.0 wires should support the lower Displayport 1.x alternative modes. However, to reduce confusion in the future, USB-IF have recently revamped the rules for certified Type-C to Type-C cables. Cables must be marked with a logo that indicates 60W or 240W. If the cable supports 3.x or newer, it will also marked the max supported speed in Gbps as part of that logo. Failure to use the right logo for what your cable supports will result in failed certification. Users are expected to assume that that any cable that does not specify wattage only supports 60W (since all USB C-to-C cables support that, except the optically isolated ones, which cannot be mistaken for a normal cable). Users are expected to assume passive cables do not support USB 3.0 data at all unless marked with: 1) a speed in Gbps, 2) a bare SuperSpeed logo (implies a max of 10 Gbps [2]) or 3) marked as Thunderbolt 3 (20 Gbps [3] unless a speed is otherwise shown). Users are presumably expected to assume that active cables only support 5Gbps unless otherwise marked, and won't support any alternative modes (unless otherwise marked) if not marked as 40 Gbps, in which case DP2.0 alternate mode should work (but I'm not sure that display port 1.x modes are guaranteed to work). Active cables are also where many problems lie especially as they don't always look different from passive cables. Active cables can mostly only support alternate modes that they were explicitly designed to support which for some is none at all. For example Active gen1 or Gen2 cables don't support USB4 at all. Active Thunderbolt 3 gen3 cables can be used for USB4 by some USB4 devices but this is an optional feature, so not all USB devices and hosts will support this. Footnotes: [1] In theory, such cables should be able to handle DP 2.0 at UHBR 20 (80 Gbps) transfers, since they can reverse the 40Gbps return communication lanes, going from 40Gbps bidirectional to 80Gbps monodirectional. However VESA has not yet standardized that as an option. [2] Since these would probably be gen1 with 5Gbps per lane, and all typeC cables have two lanes in each direction. [3] Thunderbolt 3 implies gen 2, which as 10Gbps per lane, times two lanes in C-to-C cables.
tchaffee 4y ago
Some things deserve to be standardized. Electrical plugs being a great example. Removing choice is a feature. WiFi standards are another example. It's tough to understand exactly where to draw the line, but making computer cables all standard seems like a worthy goal. I can see a future when any device from displays to external drives to your phone can all use the same cable. That would be a nice feature where removing choice would be the better outcome. Out of curiosity, what's horrible about the USB-C standard?
- scarface74 4y ago
  Thought experiment, you pick up a random USB-C cord, now answer a few questions. How much power can it deliver? Does it do data and if so, at what speed? Does it support video over USB and if so, at what resolution?
  - tpm 4y ago
    You are right, but the current topic is standardising on USB-C for power delivery. So in that case only the first question applies. And funnily enough that question is the same for every power cable and plug. Even simple wall plugs and extension cords can burn out if a device draws too much power.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      How is the “current topic” only about power delivery. What happens when I plug my hypothetical iPhone with USB-C using a “standard” USB-C cable into my computer to transfer my 4K video? What happens today if I pick up any random “standard” USB-C cable and try to charge an iPad Pro 12 inch or any other iPad that has a USB-C port, try to connect it to a video source that a USB source or connect it any USB-C device?
      - celsoazevedo 4y ago
        > What happens when I plug my hypothetical iPhone with USB-C using a “standard” USB-C cable into my computer to transfer my 4K video? Your phone will charge and you'll be able to transfer your 4K video. Isn't lightning still limited to USB 2 speeds? If so, then it won't be any slow. USB-C isn't a problem for Macs and iPads that use it, so not sure why it would be a problem on the iPhone. (I didn't understand your second question.)
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
sebzim4500 4y ago
Clearly Apple doesn't think the USB-C standard is so horrible since they are using it everywhere else in their ecosystem.
- scarface74 4y ago
  And even Apple ships a power only USB C cable that doesn’t support data with their non MagSafe equipped MacBooks.

I agree which is also why I’m very disappointed that the EU is forcing Apple into the absolutely horrible USB-C standard. People can buy android phones if they want to. Why remove choice?

Tuna-Fish 4y ago

How is USB-c horrible?

scarface74 4y ago
Before I standardized on the cables below, I had USB-C cables in my laptop bag that: - were power only up to 100W. But couldn’t do data. - could do power up to 60W and data at USB2 speeds. But they couldn’t do video over USB-C. I have a USB-C powered portable display that can do power and video directly from my laptop. - a USB-C cable that can do power, video, and data. But I’m still not sure how much data and power it can deliver. - a few smaller USB-C cables that came with my Beats headphones and my Anker battery. I don’t know what they can do. I finally threw away all of my cables besides my MagSafe cable and standardized on these for mobile devices (cheaper and not as thick). https://a.co/d/7e3gH9u https://a.co/d/7e3gH9u But these are truly “universal”. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B093YVRHMB https://www.amazon.com/dp/B093YVRHMB
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
strangemonad 4y ago
The physical form factor of the “type C” connector is great but that a good example of how broken things are is that anyone can stick that type of connector on pretty much anything - might be usb 1, might just be power delivery, might be usb 3.2, might be real thunderbolt, might be thunderbolt-esque paie framed over usb 3.2 messages, this is before even getting into the wild world of hdmi 1.4 and display port over usb 3. This mess is assuming that the vendor implemented things correctly or is using a compliant controller chip, reality just gets even worse. A simplistic interpretation: Because the consortium wanted to get everyone on board, they allow pretty much any part of the spec to not be complied with. In theory there are various profiles the should be adopted but in practice that hasn’t happened. What happens when I plug in a c-type plug? You just can’t say… and I mean you REALLY just can’t say. Will high power delivery and hdmi work (I’m looking at you broken Nintendo switch usb-c implementation), will you get thunderbolt packets wrapped over usb 3.2? Will you even get high speed? Is the cable active or passive? Will this cable give me high speed data? Will this >3ft cable give me high speed charging or just silently stay at 5v and ~1amp because the resistance on the middle pin is too high on that particular cable. To placate many vendors who wanted to because to produce cheap crap and flood online stores, many parts of the spec do this all without active protocol handshaking and simply fail silently.
- gruez 4y ago
  >The physical form factor of the “type C” connector is great At least for phone charging, I find it worse than lightning. It's way too loose (whereas lightning is snug), and I'm always worried about the plastic bit sticking out on the female side is going to break.

scarface74 4y ago

I wouldn’t go that far. While I don’t agree with the EU forcing the USB-C “standard”[sic] on private companies, it’s time for Lightning to die. Apple is already moving to USB C on iPads with only the low end iPad still being Lightning.

cesarb 4y ago
> the USB-C “standard”[sic] There's no reason for scare quotes, USB-C is an official standard. IEC 62680-1-3:2021 (https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/66588 https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/66588) is USB-C, and IEC 62680-1-2:2021 (https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/66589 https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/66589) is USB PD.
- scarface74 4y ago
  Okay, still the same thought experiment. Pick up a random USB C cable. Now tell me: How much power can it deliver? Does it support data and at what speed? Does it support video over USB C? If I bought a cheap USB power only 5W cable and got the hypothetical iPhone 15 Pro Max with USB C support that could charge faster with a 20W cable, do 10Gps data transfer and video over USB C, wouldn’t I still end up throwing away the USB C cable I got with the $100 Android phone contributing to eWaste? Isn’t that the entire argument about forcing Apple to support USB C? What happens when I buy a cheap USB C cord from the convenience store? Will it support “standard USB C”.
  - jsmith45 4y ago
    Yeah this all is a mess, but if we restrict ourselves to considering only conformant cables then the problem is at least tractable. All Type-C to Type-C support 60 W power delivery (3A at up to 20V), some support 100 W (5A at up to 20V) but those can no longer be certified, and the new 240W cables must have a certain logo on them that includes 240W clearly visible (and this means these cables can only be conformant if certified). And how much power a Type-C to Type-C cable can handle is completely orthogonal to the data it can transmit. USB does allow conforming passive cables that only have USB 2.0 lines, which can support any of the voltages. These can often be differentiated from the cables that support USB 3.x/USB4 by way of the cable being surprising thin, but this becomes harder if it supports more than the minimum 60W. Passive cables that support USB 3.x can vary in the maximum speed they support, which will also impact some alternate modes. If you want to ensure video support on a passive cable, your best option would be looking for a 0.8m or shorter passive cable that says 40Gbps, as those will all support the maximum currently allowed display-port bandwidth over type-c. [1] But all passive cables that include the USB 3.0 wires should support the lower Displayport 1.x alternative modes. However, to reduce confusion in the future, USB-IF have recently revamped the rules for certified Type-C to Type-C cables. Cables must be marked with a logo that indicates 60W or 240W. If the cable supports 3.x or newer, it will also marked the max supported speed in Gbps as part of that logo. Failure to use the right logo for what your cable supports will result in failed certification. Users are expected to assume that that any cable that does not specify wattage only supports 60W (since all USB C-to-C cables support that, except the optically isolated ones, which cannot be mistaken for a normal cable). Users are expected to assume passive cables do not support USB 3.0 data at all unless marked with: 1) a speed in Gbps, 2) a bare SuperSpeed logo (implies a max of 10 Gbps [2]) or 3) marked as Thunderbolt 3 (20 Gbps [3] unless a speed is otherwise shown). Users are presumably expected to assume that active cables only support 5Gbps unless otherwise marked, and won't support any alternative modes (unless otherwise marked) if not marked as 40 Gbps, in which case DP2.0 alternate mode should work (but I'm not sure that display port 1.x modes are guaranteed to work). Active cables are also where many problems lie especially as they don't always look different from passive cables. Active cables can mostly only support alternate modes that they were explicitly designed to support which for some is none at all. For example Active gen1 or Gen2 cables don't support USB4 at all. Active Thunderbolt 3 gen3 cables can be used for USB4 by some USB4 devices but this is an optional feature, so not all USB devices and hosts will support this. Footnotes: [1] In theory, such cables should be able to handle DP 2.0 at UHBR 20 (80 Gbps) transfers, since they can reverse the 40Gbps return communication lanes, going from 40Gbps bidirectional to 80Gbps monodirectional. However VESA has not yet standardized that as an option. [2] Since these would probably be gen1 with 5Gbps per lane, and all typeC cables have two lanes in each direction. [3] Thunderbolt 3 implies gen 2, which as 10Gbps per lane, times two lanes in C-to-C cables.

tchaffee 4y ago

Some things deserve to be standardized. Electrical plugs being a great example. Removing choice is a feature. WiFi standards are another example. It's tough to understand exactly where to draw the line, but making computer cables all standard seems like a worthy goal. I can see a future when any device from displays to external drives to your phone can all use the same cable. That would be a nice feature where removing choice would be the better outcome. Out of curiosity, what's horrible about the USB-C standard?

scarface74 4y ago
Thought experiment, you pick up a random USB-C cord, now answer a few questions. How much power can it deliver? Does it do data and if so, at what speed? Does it support video over USB and if so, at what resolution?
- tpm 4y ago
  You are right, but the current topic is standardising on USB-C for power delivery. So in that case only the first question applies. And funnily enough that question is the same for every power cable and plug. Even simple wall plugs and extension cords can burn out if a device draws too much power.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    How is the “current topic” only about power delivery. What happens when I plug my hypothetical iPhone with USB-C using a “standard” USB-C cable into my computer to transfer my 4K video? What happens today if I pick up any random “standard” USB-C cable and try to charge an iPad Pro 12 inch or any other iPad that has a USB-C port, try to connect it to a video source that a USB source or connect it any USB-C device?
    - celsoazevedo 4y ago
      > What happens when I plug my hypothetical iPhone with USB-C using a “standard” USB-C cable into my computer to transfer my 4K video? Your phone will charge and you'll be able to transfer your 4K video. Isn't lightning still limited to USB 2 speeds? If so, then it won't be any slow. USB-C isn't a problem for Macs and iPads that use it, so not sure why it would be a problem on the iPhone. (I didn't understand your second question.)

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

sebzim4500 4y ago

Clearly Apple doesn't think the USB-C standard is so horrible since they are using it everywhere else in their ecosystem.

scarface74 4y ago
And even Apple ships a power only USB C cable that doesn’t support data with their non MagSafe equipped MacBooks.