2 ms·
The terminology is something like TECH PHYSICAL-TYPE USB A/B/C So a USB-D would imply a different physical connection and end up confusing the consumer e
by gchamonlive 2mo ago
The terminology is something like
TECH PHYSICAL-TYPE
USB A/B/C
So a USB-D would imply a different physical connection and end up confusing the consumer even more.
If the cable supports 60w charging or only 25w, if it's full or half bandwidth, those characteristics seem to me like we are talking about grading quality, so a better expansion would be:
TECH PHYSICAL-TYPE GRADE
USB A/B/C 1/2/3
And define which quality the cable should present to achieve higher or lower grade levels, depending on the convention.
- MichaelZuo 2mo agoWhy not just USB-C Type 123? That allows for 999 possible permutations of usb-c cables.
- gchamonlive 2mo agobecause USB-C is a shorthand for USB Type C
- MichaelZuo 2mo agoSo? Is there a hard limit on just one “Type” in the formal name?
- gchamonlive 2mo agoNot if your aim is to confuse your costumer
- MichaelZuo 2mo agoSpec committees arent rigid automatons, they can clearly decide on say USB Type C-123 for practical implementation if they chose to.
- gchamonlive 2mo agoThis is better, USB Type C Grade 123, or USB Type C-123, or just USB-C-123