Usbc.wtf – an article and quiz to find the right USB-C cable
usbc.wtf
usbc.wtf
The USB versioning table needs some corrections:
- USB 3.1 Gen 2 is the same as USB 3.2 Gen 2 and is only found at 10Gbps.
- The 40Gbps entry is wrong, the real spec name is USB4 Gen 3x2. But it was never really advertised as such so I'd leave that out.
- 20Gbps is either USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 or USB4 Gen3x1, but I'd caution against adding this as the latter is quite rare to see (plus the above reason).
For the quiz, I would split up connecting storage devices and PCIE enclosures. Most storage only goes up to 10Gbps, and it will specifically say if it's built for Thunderbolt.
Did you confuse the latter with the former perhaps? I have never seen USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 in the wild. I have just bought a 20 Gbps USB4 cable, connected my laptop with my Android phone using it and it works lightning fast (as compared to USB 3.2 gen 1).
Length and thickness/flexibility of cable are also very important although the latter is harder to quantify.
Working on filtering out the unreasonable results.
Yet I spent an hour or so just last night trying to figure out why I was having trouble connecting two Macs before I remembered. The error message was something like "Use a Thunderbolt port..." and as I was only half paying attention, I thought, "Aren't they all Thunderbolt ports on this M1??", then I spent a while swapping dongles around and then swapping USB cables, then looking at support pages, then I finally thought, "You idiot." and ordered the right cable. Don't be me.
It doesn't look like it's made anymore but there are similar gadgets still on eBay.
The quiz also limits the returned options to Thunderbolt cables once you select "external hard drive" - which is pretty silly; I have plenty of external hard drives around here - all of them use USB 3 and none does Thunderbolt.
And for that, you need Thunderbolt 4.
Also: Please make the same thing for HDMI cables as well.
But I have a (slightly tangential) UX/design question: if now you are compelled to remove the Next button from the question pages, how would you achieve it, without reduction of functionality?
For example, on the first question, which is a single-choice question, if you make it submit on-click, then the user would lose the ability to change their mind before submitting, which is reduction of functionality. So maybe you'd consider doing a swipe-to-submit (punishing mouse users).
Then you have multiple-choice questions. Has anyone seen something clever that is both intuitive and removes the need for extra travel to the next button?
But if you really insist, then do what @yreg says, but include big, BIG back button at the top. Bonus points if you can make it look like stacked papers on the desktop:
───┬───┬───────────────┐
│ │ │
1 │ 2 │ <- │
│ │ │
│ │ A. Lorem ... │
│ │ │
│ │ B. Ipsum ... │
│ │ │
│ │ │
│ │ │
───┴───┴───────────────┘
For the mobile in the portrait mode this is not the best option, but still could work if using vertical stack of cards layout: ┌─────────────┐
│ 1 │
├─────────────┤
│ 2 │
├─────────────┤
│ <- │
│ │
│ A. Lorem ...│
│ │
│ B. Ipsum ...│
│ │
│ │
│ │
│ │
│ │
└─────────────┘
NB Next button should be present always, even if it would be meaningless because you would advance on a single-choice question automatically. Thing is, sometimes things break and then someone would need to press the Next button.Also you can use colour coding for multiple-choice questions by highlighting the Next button if anything selected, confirming for the user what they can advance.
And no, grey on white is the worst possible colour scheme ever.
We just gave them a back button if they make a mistake, which they rarely do.
Fewer clicks or taps always win, especially in the single radio button option scenarios. Visitors seem to appreciate that kind of seamless help as long as they can go back and forth if needed.
One simple approach for multiple-answer questions is to branch the additional resulting questions into the same queue to generate more than one scenario. There is a fair bit of tech out there to handle such decision making pretty easily.
https://pine64.com/product/usb-type-c-to-usb-type-c-silicone... https://pine64.com/product/usb-type-c-to-usb-type-c-silicone...
USB 2, 3 (or at least the speeds introduced with 3), and 4 are all valid choices for cables.
That's the problem with USB cables. They all seem to work when you don't look too closely.
Shouldn't this also have 'Thunderbolt' as an option? Maybe it's because I am still confused about the topic, but the port has the Thunderbolt 'lightning bolt' symbol next to it. Even if the three options given are technically sufficient, I feel that confused consumers like me would benefit from an additional 'Thunderbolt' option.
I spend a bit of time around quizzing and surveying, that brain enjoyed this quiz and the following ideas popped to mind.
- Like the big font. Could be even a bit bigger. Playing with centering could help draw attention down a bit easier.
- Try removing the next button for single choice options. Button can stay for multiple buttons. If you imagine it on a mobile device, if it's just making one selection, it is confirmation enough most of the time if you want more people to be able to get through to the end quickly, or perhaps have more clicks left in their attention to go back and try different scenarios. Having a next button is nice for summative testing in online courses to confirm your answer, but here it might be low risk enough to be able to go back and adjust if needed.
- On the results page - I'm guessing more will come here but showing me a summary of what I entered, and the cables that came up, and retailers I can get it from might be interesting.
- The progress bar is helpful to know. If you like playing with them, progress bars with circles for each step/stage could allow you to put a graphic of a laptop, phone, or a USB_A connector on end perhaps. Going through the questions made me think about "building your wire/use case" to see the options.
- If by chance you are considering leaving this up as a possible side-hustle to help people shortlist their cable, in exchange for offering an affiliate link, it would be helpful to consider getting them through as few clicks for their benefit as possible, and if that works and if you have repeat visitors, perhaps consider asking them to subscribe to an email list to keep in the loop for updates.
- What kind of updates, Decision models are fun times. Bonus points could exist offering to earn visitors email address by offering to update visitors by email if other options become available for their choices. A bit more work here to save their answers but hey. An offer to notify them of price drops (via camelcamelcamel) or things being in stock could be useful to some too for folks looking to replace more usb-a cables than they realize.
This is a horrific idea if you care about your devices; they can detach and become misaligned, applying Vbus to pins that are definitely not capable of handling 20 V.
Maybe there’s a MagSafe to Thunderbolt adapter that is a bit safer. Seems reasonable enough
https://elecjet.com/products/magthunder-x-magnetic-thunderbo...
In terms of caring about my devices it’s the other way around. While I’m gentle, Apple stopped caring about longevity for the latest and most thinnest. Maybe the current gen will finally outdo the peak of 2014 MBP.
After a number of laptops, it starts to feel like you’re buying another premature death of a new laptop instead of a new laptop.
Have hopes for the new series. Maybe in a year or two.
Edit: clarity, link
These are universal cables.
- USB A and USB C on one end
- USB C, Micro USB, and Lightning on the other end
- 10 Gbps transfer
- video over USB C for my portable second display.
- 100W power.
I travel a lot and I got tired of trying to pick out the right cable for the right circumstance.
It would be silly to charge your phone with one of these, but there is a high likelihood it would work great: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MN713AM/A/thunderbolt-4-p...
USB-C isn’t uniquely bad here. HDMI also has this issue where depending on the cable you use, you’ll be able to achieve certain resolutions and refresh rates. The hdmi spec is seemingly never printed on the cable so you’ll have to plug it in to find out.
Cheap cables are also often missing the shielding which makes them work dismally at higher resolutions.
No. Cables should be rated by data speed and max charging rate supported. If it is just for charging, it’ll be a “charging” cable with USB 2.0 speed.
If they don’t give you that but put tech garbage like “USB 3.2 gen 1” instead, keep looking.
There are USB cables rated to supply up to 240W, which most thunderbolt cables don’t currently support.
When tunneling, you are limited to DP 1.4a and wouldn't be able to do 8k/60Hz without compression (which is also optional, I believe). In alternate mode, which essentially runs DP over the USB cable without wrapping the protocol, you can use DP 2.0 and should be able to do 8k/60Hz. 8k/60Hz requires more than 25.92 Gbit/s (which is what you get in DP 1.4 HBR3, 32.40 Gbit/s including the encoding symbols), so I assume the alternate mode is not actually limited to the 40 Gbit/s bandwidth of USB4. Because it is unidirectional, I believe it can use up to 80 GBit/s.
It looks like Thunderbolt 3 only supports DP 1.4 (optionally, only 1.2 is mandatory), and you'd be limited to the same speeds as tunneling in USB4.
Honestly, if we are confused about this then I have no idea how the general public can be expected to know what their ports are capable of.
> which is also optional, I believe
Compression support (DSC) is mandatory since DP 2.0. So running DisplayPort Alt Mode 2.0 (which is basically "DP 2.0 over USB-C") should guarantee DSC support. The new USB4 Version 2 also bumps tunneled Displayport to the latest DisplayPort 2.1 spec. Then you can tunnel up-to 80 GBit/s as well (without using alt-mode).
Thunderbolt 3 is a funny protocol, because in reality only Intel made PHYs for it, so the DP version is bound to whatever Intel controller you've got. The 6000 series controllers have DP 1.2, the 7000 series has DP 1.4 and DSC.
i saw more people using og thunderbolt for hard drives, capture cards, and audio interfaces than for displays. getting out of the split firewire ecosystem was a big deal
There must be a more charitable explaination.
* Typo "through it’s 24 pins" -> its
* Tables should be consistent in sorting order (some are low specs to high specs, some are the other way around)
Back in the day it was very hard to find a cable that would work with the Quest 2 in Link mode.
The best you can get via USB BC1.2 is 1.5A at 5V. This doesn't rely on anything special in the cable aside of requiring it to be able to carry USB 1.0/2.0 data, since it's signaled over D-/D+ pins.
You can get more than that, but then you're entering a proprietary mess territory where all bets are off.
Amazon Basics standard USB-C – slow charging phones, connecting simple peripherals
Amazon Basics 100W USB-C with PD – fast charging phones, laptops, connecting monitors
Apple or Belkin Thunderbolt – connecting ultra hi res/high refresh rate monitors, high speed data transfer
Why did this need to be said?
These contortions and hand wringing is pretty much a property of overthinking neck beards.
If there were other explanations like that that could be easily mapped and displayed, it would improve the UX imo.
When seeing a dead comment that doesn't deserve to be, click into it and then click on "vouch" and the comment can be brought back to life without needing dang to get involved. Of course one vouch may not be enough on its own, but hopefully others will do also.
Just this Christmas I was trying to connect my "portable" (minisforum b550) computer to a portable monitor that only has an USB-C port. So, I would need a HDMI + power to USB-C adapter. I only found the expensive ($100) Club3D CAC-1336[1], which they call "active" adapter.
Any other option out there ? DP + power to USB-C would work as well.
[1] https://www.club-3d.com/en/detail/2610/hdmi_micro_usb_to_usb...