Hacker News Reader

Comment by Pxtl | Hacker News Reader

USB-C is actually the latter because there are several different flavours of USB-C cable that support different protocols.

This is going to suck.

View on HN

Yeah, it's gotten to the point where I'd rather just buy Thunderbolt cables (despite the extra expense) because it's the only easy way to be sure that I'm getting a cable which fully supports all the features of the USB standard. (Thunderbolt cables are compatible with USB-C connectors, USB 3.1, and USB Power Delivery.)

Even THAT isn't good enough, since not all thunderbolt 3 cables support the necessary wattage. (for example https://www.amazon.com/Belkin-F2CD081bt1M-Certified-Thunderb...)

I'm really hoping this is just a transitionary period and soon all USB-C / TB3 cables are created equal. When type-A started being used for charging there was a time with similar inconveniences.

> When type-A started being used for charging there was a time with similar inconveniences.

Meh, that problem is still there. On top of how Apple has their own take on signaling that the charger is "dumb"...

I remember in the early days you could fairly easily fry a USB port on your computer if you plugged in the wrong thing. I think they are far more tolerant these days, though the recent USB Killer doodad that's been going around shows that extreme abuse can still break things.

It is one thing for things not to work if you plug them in, but when shit gets broken by doing so then that's just inexcusable.

I don't think i have ever seen a USB port get permanently fried from having a device draw too much. I have however managed to fry a cheap thumbdrive by reversing the connector on the motherboard...

I don't even necessarily care if all USB-C cables are created equal, I just want a way to easily be able to tell from looking at the cable what capabilities it does and doesn't support.

Doesn't Ethernet have exactly the same problem though?

Nah, 1000baseT will work over bog-standard Cat5 (no need for Cat5E even) up to 100m: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabit_Ethernet

1000BaseT requires 4 pairs though (all 8 wires) whereas you could run two 100BaseT runs on a single Cat5 cable (great for adding a second drop without snaking a new wire through walls). 1000BaseTX runs on 2 pairs but requires Cat6 or better, but it doesn't matter because nothing you'd ever run into supports 1000BaseTX.

10gig on copper is likely different and I don't know enough about it to comment aside from how it's really uncommon in consumer-level gear right now. I believe a 4gig over Ethernet standard is coming soon which should be a good middle-ground.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com