Hacker News Reader

Comment by rootusrootus | Hacker News Reader

> I'm more cynical in my interpretation of Apple's motives: I think they just wanted those licensing dollars

They've switched every other non-iPhone device to USB-C. The more plausible interpretation would be that they don't want to piss off a core constituency of customers who've built up 10 years of Lightning cables. The number of people who care about standardizing on USB-C are definitely less than the vocal folks who will now complain loudly that Apple just forced them to buy a whole bunch of expensive new cables.

At least USB-C is more durable by far than Micro USB was, even if it's not as durable as Lightning. Nothing can fix the stupidity of USB-C cables, though. What a mess.

View on HN

> ”The number of people who care about standardizing on USB-C are definitely less than the vocal folks who will now complain loudly that Apple just forced them to buy a whole bunch of expensive new cables.”

I don’t think that’s true. Even hard core iPhone users likely already have multiple USB-C devices and cables, and the existing chargers are already USB (A or C) and will continue to work just fine. Apple does still include a charge cable in the iPhone box.

It’s not like the old days when people were invested into all kinds of accessories with 30-pin connectors. Most people just don’t care that much about a few Lightning cables and will be glad to rid of them.

We have 2 recentish iphones and an old c. 2016 ipad, but we have at least 10 lightning connections around the house, car, etc to plug into.

We obviously aren't going to replace all 3 devices at the same time, so it means that the first device we replace will suffer from not having the places to plug in that we currently can (sofa, kitchen, bedroom, car, office, bag, etc), or we have to get more power supplies in those areas, and over time we'll have to get another 10 cables to replace them (and usb-c cables are a total mess)

We'll adjust of course -- we were burnt when they dropped the dock connector meaning we couldn't use two of our radios any more, but we didn't make that mistake again

The good news is that all functional USB-C cables will generally charge at 30W. They might not be able to go above 30W, they might only have USB 2.0 speeds. The USB-IF has only just now come up with IMHO their first passable attempt at labelling.

However, for a couch or car charger for a phone, just about any cable that is wired correctly should do everything you want.

The problems come with alt modes and fast charging - the cable might not support the full capabilities, or the device itself (points idly at Nintendo Switch and Raspberry Pi 4) might not have shipped as USB-compliant, breaking with certain valid setups.

My opinion, the problem here isn't just cabling but troubleshooting help - how do I know the cable or charger I'm using isn't charging my computer at full speed? And which one is the problem?

All functional USB-C cables will charge at 60W.

Yes. The minimum capability of any USB-C cable is 3A 20V charging (60W), and USB 2.0 480 Mbps data.

> They've switched every other non-iPhone device to USB-C

The only device I know of that started out on lighting and switched to USB-C was the iPad, and that was specifically because they're pushing it as a "creator" device, for which people needed to be able to plug in things like flash drives, SD card adaptors, cameras, mice and keyboards, etc. There's significantly less drive for those kinds of accessories on iPhone

The remote for the new AppleTV is also USB C.

I have the latest Apple TV 4K, and it still uses the Lightning connector to charge the remote.

The newest Apple TV, announced earlier this month, uses USB-C for the remote. https://www.apple.com/apple-tv-4k/specs/

To be fair, almost everyone missed this announcement. It got less attention than the new iPads.

The 3rd-gen Apple TV 4K introduced on the 18th switched the charging port on the remote from Lightning to USB-C.

Then you don’t have the latest Apple tv

It feels like anything labeled "Pro" got USB-C faster, except the AirPods Pro gen 2 :(

People expect to be able to charge the headphones they use for their phone the same manner they charge their phone. I suspect they'll be quick to change over such accessories once they change the phone port - they have had several smaller revisions to the non-pro AirPods, such as adding support for wireless and MagSafe charging cases. We will likely just be able to buy a new case when that happens.

The real surprise is that the mice, keyboards and trackpads haven't gotten a meaningful update in a long while, so there's no USB-C on any of them. You'd think they would have long ago decided to switch those to USB-C, since the computer ships with a C charger - and because they could justify removing the bundled cables from the packaging.

I've never understood why Apple mice and keyboards were popular. Just buy Logitech!

No gestures and no fingerprint reader

I think there's more drive for that than you'd expect. The camera breakout kit is really popular in my circles. Not for cameras, but for talking to USB audio interfacs.

Population of one here, I will gladly throw out all my lightening cables. USB-C please.

> The only device I know of that started out on lighting and switched to USB-C was the iPad

The new AppleTV remote

> and that was specifically because they're pushing it as a "creator" device, for which people needed to be able to plug in things like flash drives, SD card adaptors, cameras, mice and keyboards, etc.

Apple has sold a USB to Lightning adapter for ages.

Last week, with the new Apple TV the remote switched from Lightning to USB-C charging. That indicates that they are now in the process of transitioning accessories. It’s a pretty clear indicator of an overall shift in their plans.

Maybe? The USB specifications calls for USB Micro-B to have the same 10,000 connect/disconnect cycles as USB-C:

-----------------------------------

Table 3-1 USB Electrical, Mechanical and Environmental Compliance Standards

Performance Requirement

1500 cycles

5000 cycles for Mini “B”

10,000 cycles for Micro series

10,000 cycles for ruggedized Standard “A”

Cycle rate of 500 cycles per hour if done automatically and 200 if manual cycle

-----------------------------------

https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/CabConn20.pdf

From what I'm guessing, a lot of the problems can stem from either parts that don't meet the spec because it saves some money, or sloppy QC on the solder joints. Unless I'm missing something, USB-C doesn't inherently solve problems of manufacturers picking out of specification parts or bad QC.

The main thing USB-C and Lightning have going for them, which Micro-B doesn't, is the redundancy of two connection pads.

I've had more than one female Lightning port start to get tetchy about which direction a cable goes in.

All I'll miss from Lightning is being able to clean the port with a toothpick. Then again, that's not a small thing. When I hear/feel a bit of grit in a USB-C port I get a sinking feeling, with Lightning I just reach for a dental pick.

You can clean out a USB-C with a toothpick too, I did mine a few months ago when the connections got flakey and I got a ton of fluff out and now cables click in (which I forgot was supposed to happen).

Snap a toothpick in half roughly and you should get a sliver on the broken end that fits around the USB-C tongue very well for cleaning lint.

> Maybe? The USB specifications calls for USB Micro-B to have the same 10,000 connect/disconnect cycles as USB-C

Micro USB was such a dumpster fire. I never got within two orders of magnitude of that spec, I'm pretty sure. It's a terrible connector, easily broken.

Mini USB was terrible, and would typically fail well below 1,000 on the device side. Mobile phones might not make it through their first year with a mini usb port back in the day, depending on how many times a day someone attached it to a charger.

It was replaced with Micro USB and effectively removed from USB - but a lot of devices still shipped it because it was cheaper.

> Nothing can fix the stupidity of USB-C cables, though

What is the stupidity of USB-C cables? Honestly don't know, simply not up on USB or cable technology

In short there is no way of knowing by looking at a USB-C cable or socket what it supports because there is a myriad of standards all using the same connector - USB Power Delivery, USB 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 4.0, Thunderbolt 3, Thunderbolt 4, DisplayPort over USB

You have to usually measure to know what does the cable support and what speeds and or voltages are possible.

Not only that, but it is not possible to make a do-everything USB-C cable.

Can you elaborate? What two features can't be combined? Wouldn't a cable with the new "80 Gbps 240W" logo do everything? https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vkQLWTdsaQ6Cw7S6wRsWHD-970...

Zeus-X Pro 5ft/1.5m Universal... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B093YVRHMB?

- USB A and USB C on one end

- micro USB A, Lightning and USB C on the other end

- 100W charging

- 10Gbps transfer

- supports video over USB C

These have replaced all of my Lightning cables and most of my USB C cables.

I'd want to see a signal analyzer result at 10Gbps before I trust that speed claim on their 5 foot and 2 meter options.

But even if that's true, that means it can't run at Gen 3 speeds (or Gen 4, which has the same cable requirements).

USB-C is only a connector spec, and the actual USB protocol it supports could be one of many different versions and options. Or it can be Thunderbolt 3 or 4!

There’s an oft-repeated complaint that they are too versatile

The port is too versatile for the cables.

We replaced trying to figure out which plug fits in which of the many ports we have, with trying to figure out which identical-looking cable will do what we want when we plug it into the single kind of port.

This is arguably still an improvement at least for some people, but does suck.

They are opaque. For a given use case you need to know which USB-C cable you need, and they all look just alike, but can have varying capabilities. You can't even make a do-everything cable, either.

All these are existing variations of cables with a USB-C tip: Quest link cable, thunderbolt cable, charge only, data only no video, video but not 120hz, etc. It's not like you'll have fewer cables to manage if one device changes its port to USB - C.

The biggest change will be in people's backpacks and suitcase. Now they'll have one cable instead of two(or two instead of three if they carry an apple watch). All your other devices still need their own dedicated cable. I'll still carry two cables though because sometimes I want to charge two devices simultaneously.

If you mean cables that have a USB-C tip at one end, that's true, but I could cite thousands of distinct cables that have a USB-A tip at one end.

Also "charge only" cables violate the spec, and thunderbolt-only cables violate the spec.

When the cable is USB-C at both ends, there are different speeds and that's pretty much the only thing you need to care about. Occasionally you need to check whether it's a 60 watt cable or something higher, but not often.

Unlike every other connector, with USB C the male end is in the phone and the cable is female. Since the male end has a thin piece that inserts into the cable, it both invites lint to get stuck the port and makes it somewhat risky to clean out, as snapping that thin piece requires replacing the port (and maybe the whole phone depending on how it's made).

Compare to lightning, which AFAIK is indestructible, and lint can easily be cleaned out of the phone port with a toothpick.

I'm sure people more knowledgeable than me will have other facts as well.

Did anyone ever snapped that "thin piece"? It is not that thin, and in fact, I never managed to break even the much thinner micro-USB tongue.

I have broken USB sockets, and seen broken sockets, but every time, it was either wear or the connector being torn off a PCB (they are not always mounted properly). The only times I have seen a broken tongue was with USB-A connectors (the big ones), probably from a plug being forcefully inserted the wrong way. Micro-USB doesn't have this problem because of the shape of the connector prevents it and USB-C is reversible.

Mostly it's a mess of unknowns as to weather the cable you buy will actually do perform well. With USB-C cables it's all fine print and advertising. This article is from 4 years ago and gets updated each year. https://www.androidauthority.com/state-of-usb-c-870996/

I just want my Mac and my iPhone to use the same charger. It’s not necessarily about the spending.

And just in time for MagSafe's return...the iPhone will go to USB-C! Of course, you can still charge a Mac over USB-C — it's just not as much of a unification as it seems.

Does MagSafe charging cause a Macbook Pro to heat up in the same way that USB-C charging on the left side of the device does?

When I saw that on my new M1 Max, I assumed so, so I never used it. (Also because I had USB-C charging for everything else...except my iPhone.)

Nope. My MacBook Pro w/ M1 Max has never even gotten warm, even while plugged in with MagSafe and pegging every CPU at 100% with SIMD instructions.

Cool (ha!) good to know. The times I've noticed mine getting pretty toasty when charging was from the left side, so I consciously try to avoid it (apparently a sibling suggests it's Intel only, so it totally could just be selection bias on my part). Regardless, I'm glad MagSafe doesn't have that problem. Thanks!

Wasn't that just an issue with the final 16" Intel MBP? I don't think any M1/M2 Macs have had that problem.

If it is, then I've just had rotten luck, because every time I notice "hmm, that's toasty" it's plugged in on the left side. Absolutely no science done, to be fair.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com