2d ago

Realized 99% of all my chargers are USB-C. This can only mean one thing. New USB bout to drop!

You're viewing a single thread.

288 comments

USBC has done something truly amazing. You used to be able to tell within reason what the capabilities of USB were by the connector or the color of the port. Now there's dozens of options and there's hardly anyway for you to tell what cable and port support what features.
Maybe your port and charger can throw out 20 volts at 3 and 1/2 amps. Maybe you can throw out 20 volts at 6 amps (dell) maybe your device doesn't negotiate correctly and they say to only use an a-c cable
Don't get me wrong, I love the port. Multidirectional, doesn't really wear out, does have a tendency to get a little dirty though. Lightning was a little more forgiving on dirt.
Labeling on the ports are all vague labeling on the cables is non-uniform or not existent.
But, truth is they probably come up with half a dozen specs for USBC that half your it doesn't support. And they'll probably come out with God knows how many more before they Make a new connector.
- I don't agree with the good ol' days, beyond the blue connectors of USB3, there was no way of telling if a cable was charge only or data+charge. No way to tell if it was USB 1 or 2. If it was standard 0.5 amp or "fast charge", up to 3 amps. There was a lot of different plugs, regular, mini, micro, A and B types.
  I agree with everything you say about USB-C tho.
  
  It wasn't better, but it was readable. I don't want to go back, I want them to fix what we have now to be readable.
  
  Here's an idea, all C cables supporting any level of PD must have the specs stamped on both plugs.
  
  I'm down with it, but it's a lot
  Wattage/transferspeed/displayport/thunderbolt/PD
  Even the current icons don't tell you more than speed these days
  
  USB 4 Version 2.0
  Oh for fuck's sake. So that's newer and has more bandwidth than USB4 gen2 and gen3, right?
  At least we got away from the USB 3.x where 3.0 and 3.2 Gen 1x1 were the same thing, despite 3.0 and 3.2 having a 9 year gap between them so you kinda expected 3.2 to be faster, but it was only faster if it was an x2 flavor, so 3.2 gen 1x2 was the faster version (extra lane for data) of 3.0 and 3.2 gen 2x2 was the faster version of 3.1 I guess?
  Whoever at USB-IF is in charge of this versioning needs to take a long walk off a short pier.
  
  I gotta say the usb versioning thing is gotta be the most confusing mess. Its hard to understand.
  
  Terrible news for all my USB-C cables less than 2 & 1/2 inches long!
  :) yeah good point & thanks for the pic
  
  That is a lot of space for very little info, that means nothing to anyone who doesnt already know what th codes mean. U4.2.40 would be just as useful.
  This is the programmer art of graphic design.
  
  Yeah. It was already happening circa USB3. It’s not because of the connectors, but the broadening spectrum of requirements of client devices.
  Maybe USB-C was a missed opportunity to address it, but it certainly didn’t “start the fire”.
  
  It was extremely easy to determine if a cable carried data. If there were four wires/metal strips at the end it had data. If it was only the two fat ones it was power only.
  
  Nah, I just checked the USB Micro B cable that came with an older handsfree, all strips present but doesn't carry data. So no standard.
- People can hate all they want on USB-C with all these details that may be technically true, but the only issue I've had in years is with chargers varying in power output and occasionally that means I try to charge something that either takes forever or never charges. It's an edge case and I consider it a charger issue, not a cable one...
  Life is definitely simpler now with USB-C being pretty standard, and Lightning cables can burn in hell. Those anti-standard bullshits have caused me to buy a dozen of them for friends and test devices (I'm a web dev) and yet I've never owned a mobile Apple product and never would. Fuck Lightning -- cannot possibly say it enough. I'm glad the EU agrees.
  
  that means I try to charge something that either takes forever or never charges.
  That's a pretty significant failure IMO.
  I don't want to go back, but I want shit be labeled and work. You go to bed and wake up to a 7yo on a trip with a dead device, you're going to have a bad day.
  
  It's not a failure to default to a safe level if it can't negotiate properly. That's a feature.
  
  That's if the manufacturer doesn't just install a max wattage chip in every cable.
  Unfortunately this is not uncommon.
  
  I'm not extremely familiar with the USB-C handshake, but isn't it between the device and power supply?
  
  It used to be that simple. You could put a certain value of resistor between two pins and that was that.
  This guy covered it quite well
  https://superuser.com/questions/1555520/what-can-a-program-find-out-about-a-usb-c-cable-attached-to-the-computer
  In brief, Type-C cable specs are nearly independent from USB data and USB Power Delivery (Type-C can support anything).
  By specs, Type-C connector/cable provides two methods of self-identification.
  First one is by combination of resistor pulls-up and pulls-down on both sides of CC wires. Since there are two CC pins in Type-C connectors, and several analog levels, many combinations are available. Other than connect function itself and basic determination of source-sink roles and power capacity, several "alternate" functions are defined, as Display Port, Audio, and Debug mode.
  The second amendment to Type-C is the mandatory embedding of e-markers into every C-C cable. >The information in e-marker contains name of manufacturer and current carrying capability of particular cable.
  The state of CC1/CC2 pins is usually acquired by a special CC-controller chip. The CC-controller communicates with main system by I2C interface. The register-based interface is standardized in Intel document USB Type-C Connector System Software Interface Specification
  So, many manufacturers are including markers with maximum settings that exceed the wires'/cables' capability.
  
  But it's not really a failure of the cable (typically, I know there are edge cases but I don't think I've run into them recently). In a perfect world, it possibly plugging in means it works as expected I guess, but I think it's a better tradeoff to expect users to know that some devices require a bit more power, and have a plug that still works universally. "This charger doesn't have enough power" is easy enough to be understood by a 90 yo I would think.
  Chargers should be labelled with the output they provide (mine are), but you are right, devices probably should be labelled better with what they require.
  
  Admittedly, i've only had a couple cable problems and one of those would have likely been labeled wrong as they were cheap cables with max wattage programmed.
  One of my users came to me with a C-C phone cable that had used between a MacBook pro and a Mac charger. "This got really hot and started to stink when I used it"
  uhh, crap, here have this handed them a 6 foot 100w cable and please throw that old one away I'll give you a new phone cable too.
  My other problem is with QC on random cables. I have some 6' that won't pass 25w. I have a Klein tester that will enumerate wattage. I throw away cables that won't at least support fast charging.
  I also have a couple Samsung trio wireless multi-device chargers, they insonsistent. If I use the 45 watt Samsung brick that came with it it works fine. If I use any other brick, it refuses to use anything but a full on 65 watt charger. I don't know if they ignore the spec, or enumerate differently, maybe they give a different output on 9v than others, but we need to have this overall issue with compatibility and semi-functional usage that just feels janky.
  I hope that eventually with GaN and other tech that everything will just do 100w or maybe all devices will go down to only needing 45 watt. It would be super nice if everything just played well together.
  
  won’t pass 25w
  Reminded of what looked to be a great deal on USB-C cables from a major manufacturer (Anker I think).
  Fine print: not for MacBook Pro yaddayadda! Yeah the things can’t hang for it. Gotta spend way more.
  I wonder what the best cable labeling solution is for new cables purchased with known specs. Bet a handful of well-resourced geeks do their own printing right on them.
  
  For a business, it's buy analyzer and pick a minimum spec.
  For a home, pray the reviews are right.
  
  Did you know that USB C cables can be unidirectional? As in, they only work plugged in in one direction. You know how I know that? Cause I’ve soldered usb-c cables myself. I own one that only plugs in in one direction (and works)! I’m honestly very surprised you’ve only had issues with charging, do you not need them for data? So many of my cables are charging only, they literally do not function for data at all. It’s a nightmare.
  
  I have used them as data cables, such as for migrating Android phones. Don't remember having any issues.
  
  Yeah I think some of my cables charge my phone at different speeds.
  
  I haven't had that issue for years. From my perspective only the cheap or early cables had issues like that. Not your experience I take it?
  
  I've had exacrly 5x more failures of USB C ports than I've had of micro that is 5, and 1), and I've had way more micro devices over a much longer period (and still have some). It may technically be a "better" port, but my experience doesn't reflect that.
  I have to label cables and chargers because some C devices today still don't support all charging specs, so I have to verify a device charges on a charger to know for sure.
  At what point shouldn't a device be able to negotiate down to the lowest charge capability, instead of not charge at all? That the spec permits this to happen is a major failure.
  It's fantastic that C is the convergence standard, but let's not act like it's close to perfect. I have to verify with every device I use if the charger actually works for it, and not just "is the charger powerful enough", but "does it actually charge even though I know it should because it supports all the capabilities as the device".
  
  I don't know why but my luck has been nearly opposite to yours. The only thing close I've had to your experience was I had a USBC port on my phone get dirty once and I had to clean it out. 0 actual hardware failures and very few charger problems
- Yeah, but at least you're not sol when you're at an apple house with an android device at 10% battery any more. If you need a cable with very specific capabilities that's on you to do that research imo. The alternative is making every cable more expensive when most people don't need it.
  
  I'm looking forwards to when my in-laws upgrade their phones and no longer get to use their "superior" lightning ports
  
  i hate apple with a burning passion but at least their cable lasted more then 3 years without wearing the port down to where you need to angle the connector with force or it doesnt charge
  
  I'll be honest, in a vacuum and as a charging cable, lightning is kinda okay and the durability is pretty good. But I much prefer USB C any day
- To solve the issue of identifying the capabilities of the cable: CaberQ.
  Though a bit expensive for what it is.
  
  Would have been nice for some kind of forethought on a labeling system.
  But there's so many combinations now of power, data, audio, and video, and sup glasses of thunderbolt, display port, HDMI. Even if you put a 4-digit code on every cable listing exactly what they support people would never be able to understand and track down backward compatibility.
  I'd be surprised in the next port change if we don't end up with some fiber optic in there.
  
  https://caberqu.com/home/20-43-c2c-caberqu-746052578813.html#/27-with_or_without_case-with_case It's not awful for price but there are more complete testers like treedix: https://treedix.com/
  What bothers me is all these testers assume you are a USB hardware wizard and know which pin combo supports which USB standard.
  I want something that tells you how fast and how much power the wire can handle.
  The newer cables have chips to talk to chargers to not exceed the power ratings. Why can't these chips or testers also tell you how fast the wire can handle?
  
  I thought I was smart going back to a video that featured two USB C cable testers. I onky watched the video and didnt check or paid attention what the brand was.
  They are, in fact, these exact two brands.
  
  What bothers me is all these testers assume you are a USB hardware wizard and know which pin combo supports which USB standard.
  The CaberQ can do exactly that.
  
  https://caberqu.com/home/39-61-ble-caberqu-0611816327412.html#/31-hard_shell_case-with_case/32-screen_protector-with_screen_protector/34-240w_40gbit_s_usb4_cable-with_usb4_cable
  I'd buy one but they are sold out.
  Turn out there's even an app for Android and iOS. I was wondering how you got all that information in one screen shot.
- Hopefully this will help
  
  I saw that one back in the day. Never seen any of it in the wild yet.
  Would be nice to get TB/DP on there too.
  
  And you’ll never see it on an Apple product, though you’ll never find an Apple product that isn’t supporting the full standard it’s still a problem when you’re trying to find a cable and aren’t sure if you’re using a real Apple one or a lookalike.
  
  Apple sells 60 and 240 watt c-c cables.
  The 240 watt are only 5g
  The cables are unlabeled.
  They sell beats brand too, they are unlabeled to their speed.
- One day usb-C will be able to do my taxes and walk my dog
- does have a tendency to get a little dirty though
  Dollar store keyboard cleaner air cans are good for this. There really should have been a little spring-loaded flap on the connector, like later SPDIF has.
  
  A mechanical cover would have been good. Hell, even a rubber dust boot attached at one end would have been useful.
  I keep a little deox-it around and use wooden toothpicks dipped in it. Pocket lint, and dust seem to collect on the left and the right on the ports and make them feel like they're loose.
  I had one the other week that was really bad I ended up digging it out with a dental pick. The phone had gotten wet and it was slowly making diy concrete down in there. But yeah much better to rely on air or not conductive tools, any to scratch off the protective plating
  
  When you look at the amount of people and corporations behind a spec like USB... and no one thought of this? I wonder if there are IP67 USB-C connectors?
  
  I suspect it was give and take. Lightning was a very, very slim port, but didn't have enough pins/shielding to do high speed. C has a boatload of pins, great shielding and picked up dual sided, but the hole needs to be thicker to do this.
  Other than a rubber flap on the outside of the chassis, I can't think of any way to protect it from the inside that wouldn't either impede plugging in or wear out quickly.
  There's def some need there.
  
  Just picture a rectangular plunger plate with a hole in it that sits over the wafer inside the receptacle. Then when you plug in, the plunger is pushed back. Tiny springs push it back out.
  I know just enough to know that something like this is more complex to engineer than you want... It's awfully small, it needs to move freely even when crudded up, it needs to not impede plugging in, etc
  Of course this won't protect 100% from ingress, just reduce it.
  
  just reduce it.
  Any reduction would be great.
  It would also be interesting to make the port something like a sim tray. you could eject it and replace it with a new one for a couple bucks. You might only replace it a handful of times, enough that the internal sealed contacts wouldn't wear out.
  
  I like that but you have to replace your phone every year anyway so...
  
  yeah, i'm foolishly hoping we get away from that
- Ikea PD-PPS charger + Ikea 100W labeled cable = done.
  
  Well, that covers my phone, but then 45 watts won't run my laptop, and if I plug in my phone and my laptop, they only get 22 watts each.
  Then the cable: Can it be used for data transmission? What speeds does it cover? Will it transmit data through a DisplayPort or HDMI? If I unplug it from the power and plug it into the USB-C on my monitor, will I get video?
  There are so many features, and it's not like you can just go ohh I'll get this USB-4_g cable and know what it does. Even the webpage for the Rundhult has no mention of what features are supported other than 100w.
  The whole spec is complicated AF. You could spend $100 on a brick/cable that can do either 100W or high speed, but if you only need part of the equation, you can spend $30 on a brick and cable. What they support is almost never enumerated, even on the packaging.
  
  Your laptop will charge at 22 or 45W. Easy!
  Cable will work for data at usb 2.0, as it says on the packaging. So it won´t work for video alt modes. Easy!
  My monitor has an input cable that allows for maximum video resolution and maximum power delivery. I never need to take it out. Easy!
  
  Which cable are you talking about? This one supports data and mentions nothing about alt modes. https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/rundhult-usb-c-to-usb-c-black-white-20581106/
  
  The one that came with my monitor. Easy!
  If I ever need a new one for such an extremely specific task, I´ll make sure to spend a few minutes to make sure I buy the right one. Takes a minute, but easy!
  The Ikea one says it only supports 480Mbps, so that´s a no-no for video. Sad, but easy!
  
  lol, no it’s not easy. You saying “easy” doesn’t mean it is in any sense of the word. Like the person you’ve been responding to before said, usb c can support many things and not support others. For example, USB C cables can literally be unidirectional! That sure isn’t listed because it’s assumed to work bidirectionally, but it’s not a requirement. I literally have a unidirectional usb c cable in fact.
  Just cause it says 480 doesn’t mean jack when
  You weren’t talking about this cable originally, you were making a claim about a cable that literally wasn’t mentioned in the article. I gave an example of a cable that directly disproved your comment in a facetious manner.
  No consumer should be expected to know usb c standards (that’s literally the point of this conversation)
  480 Mbps has nothing to do with supporting video. This Reddit thread explains it way better than I can, but support for a feature in the cable has absolutely nothing to do with data transfer rate. https://www.reddit.com/r/UsbCHardware/comments/ji87mc/usb_32_gen_2_typec_monitor_compatibility/j5dohy5/
  
  I was the one that mentioned the 100W Ikea cable as a cheap example to combine with that charger
  Too bad if someone doesn´t want to know the tiniest bit about standards. They´ll have to get help if they don´t want to read the packaging or symbology. Meanwhile the rest of us can enjoy hooking up our phones to our laptop chargers or monitors without having to waste resources on unnecessarily complex cables
  If you want to do something fancy like hooking up to your monitor, you´ll have to use the unusually sturdy cable that came with it or take 2 minutes to read about which cable you need
  
  So what happens when your laptop is pulling more than 22w?
  Let's say your cable is 5G. Guess what, that doesn't mean it supports display port or thunderbolt.
  These cables all have ID chips in them that tell the systems what they do and don't support. 1 they just can't be bothered to put it on the packaging, 2 a lot of the cheapest Chinese cables have their chips set incorrectly.
  The one cable for all solutions problem is a great idea. They could just standardize on a 240 watt 40/60 cable and sell it everywhere that would be great. Hell, I'd be satisfied if there were two cables, 240/5 with black connectors and a 65/60 with white connectors.
  
  Then you need a more powerful charger!
  If you really keep tumbling into these kind of situations, you need to a) read up on what you buy or b) get advice from a trusted seller. Easy!

288 comments