In my opinion, the mess is actually much worse with USB-C, as with earlier connectors I at least had a chance of guessing whether the cable/connection will work by looking at the connectors. With USB-C? No idea.
Most devices are USB, they work and charge over the connector just fine. On laptops, connecting displays work as well. They will either use TB or negotiate for HDMI/DP which is also fine.
The only real outliers are crappy companies which deliberately break protocols like Nintendo on their Switch.
There are USB-C Charge Cable, that does no Data ( To save cost )
>On laptops, connecting displays work as well. They will either use TB or negotiate for HDMI/DP which is also fine.
That is assuming the cable could do TB, which is also not true.
Once you get USB-C to everywhere to everyday normal users, they expect it to plug in and work.
Oh, wait, Ethernet is a thing. I wonder how they just completely missed that when making USB 3. The only thing that should be differentiated between cables is max power delivery rating and data rate.
Edit: typo
The OS knows the USB controller hierarchy, knows what the deveice wants, etc.
Cables might be a mess, but it's because low-level software is absolute bovine manure biogas plant on fucking fire level shit when it comes to user experience.
Just a few weeks ago I had to spend about 1.5-2 hours (not exaggerating) trying to get 2 Logitech gamepads working on Win10. (It worked fine at first, but wouldn't survive a reboot. It worked fine in Linux.)
USB type C cables are active (they have silicon in them and handshake themselves with the host rather than simply being wire (possibly plus a resistor) as with old USB cables.)
Cost will come down as volume goes up. Currently the only way to buy a cheaper cable is to buy a noncompliant and possibly dangerous one.
> Life would become so much easier if everything was USB C to USB C
I would agree with the added caveat of "... and if you could tell by inspection what sort of cable you have: speed, power, and protocols supported -- and some way to verify conformance"
Once they become ubiquitous I imagine the usual forces will drive the cost way down so we'll end up with something like the current mix of good and crap cables. Hopefully nobody will advertise 100 W over 30 gauge wire, but probably...!
I have no doubt overall cost will go down, but I'm curious by how much can we reasonably expect, and if said difference is actually meaningful.
Consider Type-C qualification testing[1] as it stands...it's quite convoluted. Any cost savings from volume economies of scale would be all for nought if testing such high-performance products can't scale proportionally. Given Type-C was specifically designed for the cost sensitive consumer market from the onset and how capability keeps increasing in ways that make one wonder if it's even the same fundamental underlying technology anymore, I wonder how close to the "market noise floor" a qualified device truly is.
In the defense/aerospace industry, it's commonplace for a $0.07 electronic component to have $10 of testing behind it before profit and indirect costs are baked in. Same outcome with MIL-DTL-38999 interconnect, which has literally been around for longer than I've been alive, supplied by multiple competing manufacturers, and leveraged by multiple industries (not just mil/aero)--testing requirements ultimately keep costs high. Although not the mil/aero market, it wouldn't surprise me if Type-C is already close to a similar point of diminishing returns.
That they gave you the USB-A to USB-C cable as your go-to cable is a red flag that they are peddling the connector as a marketing bullet point.