Hacker News Reader

> Yes there are many problems with the ecosystem, but it's still really not as bad as using both lightning and USB-C like Apple does[…]

People underestimate just how stable lightning cables are. After 11 years they have two types of certified cables in terms of data and charging capabilities, and you can tell them apart by whether the other end is USB-A or USB-C

While there are different kinds of USB-C cable, they all support at least as much as a lightning cable. So while it's annoying when they're badly labeled, it's hard for me to see this as a downside in comparison to lightning.

this is only true if you accept the circular definition of "well, if it does less than lightning then it's not a true USB-C cable".

in practice there are lots of usb-c cables that don't do data, which all lightning cables do. they're just not officially certified ones. which means they're not "real" usb-c cables.

again, the problem is it turns out in practice virtually nobody is using "real" usb-c cables, and if you want to stand on the formal definition, then we can formally say the standard has no real market penetration and can reasonably be disregarded until it catches traction.

if you can walk into a bodega and be assured that the lightning cable sitting on the shelf is going to be a certified and approved cable with data transfer, and the usb-c cable probably won't, then that's kinda all that really matters.

(and thus, we can see why certification programs like lightning exist. the $2 lightning cable on the bodega counter probably has better capabilities than the $5 usb-c cable on the counter because of the certification process.)

Just about any USB-C cable you buy that isn't a "data" cable just means its not rated for the ultra high 3.0+ speeds. It's incredibly rare to come across a USB-C cable that has absolutely no data connection, they practically all support at least USB 2.0. I've never come across a cable that didn't support at least USB 2.0 speeds that wasn't just otherwise broken, or was some weird one like USB-C to a barrel adapter or something.

There are some sold for privacy which do not have the data pins.

However, I believe this prevents negotiation for power delivery. Even if not, you need the CEC pins for the cable to function and that is a data channel as well (there are firmware update specs over CEC)

I've seen a bunch of uncertified lightning cables on Amazon, but not any power-only USB-C cables, despite looking through a lot more USB-C listings.

I have no idea what fraction of the USB-C cables are certified, but they're not broken. They have the wires because people want the wires. For such a basic feature, this is more effective than certification.

> which all lightning cables do

This is not true at all.

I've bought lightning cables at the dollar store that are single-sided (one side has "UPSIDE" written on it, you can't flip it over), power only

edit: I buy a lot of cheap USB gadgets (fans, flashlights etc) so I checked my cables. Not one of my USB-C to C cables are missing data. Plenty of USB-A to C cables are, though. So as long as you avoid USB-A you may be fine.

Nothing is really changing.

Currently:

- 70% of people have been buying the absolute cheapest lightning conforming cable they could find on amazon. They buy them in 3 packs, use them until they inevitably catch fire or fray within a few months and then throw them out and use the next one.

- 25% of people buy the cheapest lightning cable they can find on amazon that is rated for MFI. They've been burned enough by the bad cable and are just savvy enough to know there is a made-for-iphone program of "approved" lightning cables that actually conform to standards

- 5% of people buy OEM first-party cables from Apple

...

Now you will see:

- 70% of people buying the absolute cheapest usb-c conforming cable they can find on amazon (which is not "really" usb-c but the plug fits so who cares). They will buy them in 3 packs, use them until they fray or catch fire and then throw it out and use the next one

- 20% of people will buy the cheapest certified usb-c cable they can find on amazon because they are just tech savvy enough to know there is a difference and that its worth finding a good one. But this cable will likely only be usb 2 speeds.

- 5% of people will buy a premium usb-c cable with usb 3 speeds for 10Gbs transfer because they actually use and care about it.

...

As you can see, on the low end nothing changes. Most people will still buy the absolute cheapest cable they can find and have no idea what they are buying or care that there is a difference. These people will still benefit from being able to use the same cable for everything because it fits in the hole and thats all they care or understand.

But at least now there are more options and power available to the tiny percent of the population that actually does care and understand the difference.

All in all, its only upsides. Everybody wins. The only real downside is throwing out whatever collection of lightning cables you might already have.

Remember that as cool as transfer speeds sound, almost nobody transfers stuff using a cable off their iPhone. 99% of people will airdrop a few photos off, download music from spotify/apple music, and stream or maybe download from netflix or disney plus for offline viewing. But really VERY VERY VERY few people are transferring using the cable. For the people that do, they are probably transferring huge video files they recorded off their device and they will know to get a good quality usb 3 compatible usb-c cable. But thats like 1 out of 100 people, if that.

> 20% of people will buy the cheapest certified usb-c cable they can find on amazon because they are just tech savvy enough to know there is a difference and that its worth finding a good one. But this cable will likely only be usb 2 speeds.

If you don't need data transfer, there are reasons like cost and cable thickness/flexibility to get a charging-only cable.

Most people need very few cables over USB 2.0 speeds, and they typically don't need those to be very long.

Unfortunately, there are a bunch of non-conforming USB-C implementations (original Switch models, Raspberry Pis, and tons of other charging-only gadgets) such that it is not possible at any cost to standardize on a stack of USB-C cables with the same properties.

The annoying part is that cables still tend to not be labelled with their properties, it is challenging to determine if a device properly supports power delivery and cables rated > 30W, and there aren't a lot of tools to diagnose issues or cable capabilities.

I have devices that only works with Usb a to c cables. I also have devices that doesn’t accept the same. ditto for e-marked cables, and passive charging cables. I now need to get a usb c cable tester and label each cable and device.

Same. I have a few “USB-C” devices they inexplicably won’t charge from some (mostly Apple) USB-C chargers. But they work fine with some other USB-C chargers and all USB-A chargers with an A-C cord.

But, with these phones, I can at least get rid of the dozens of Lightning cables I’ve accumulated. And only a few of my devices are still USB-A, so I imagine I’ll be all C soon enough (probably just in time for USB-D or something else).

USB C devices are supposed to have resistors on the CC pins to help negotiate power delivery with the port supplying power and to allow detection of pin orientation[1]. But to save a few pennies (or because no one read the USB C specs), many cheap devices don't have these resistors and USB-C chargers that implement PD are almost certainly configured to not supply any voltage at the VBUS pins until a connection is actually detected. As a result these devices won't charge from a spec compliant USB C charger. Cheap chargers on the other hand may be nothing more than a basic 5V 1A USB A charger with a C port instead and happily supply power on the pins regardless of the CC pin status. Likewise A-to-C cables would do the same thing, since A chargers just supply 5V continuously without any negotiation.

[1]:https://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/AppNotes/00001914B.pd...

Yeah, but some of these aren't "cheap" devices (Wahoo fitness devices have this flaw). Wahoo actually calls out Apple chargers in their doc, which is super annoying because it's NOT an Apple problem, it's shit design/penny-pinching from Wahoo.

And there are USB-C chargers (provided with Google phones and Belkin USB-C car chargers) that will charge the devices. So, I guess they're ignoring the lack of negotiation and just providing 5v? No idea.

So, consumers are left guessing what will work or won't. And carrying at least two chargers (one "dumb" and one "smart/PD").

I don't mind people implementing things in this way to save money.

I have a problem with them advertising it as "USB-C" and USB-IF doing nothing to stop this false advertising.

Yeah I'm aware of this issue, and specifically check for c-to-c compatibility, this falls under the category of "flawed implementations" because these devices are NOT to spec.

It's common for rechargeable lights to not support c-to-c cables and require a usb a to usb c cable.

For phone users who only want to charge their phones, it's fine. It's hard to go too wrong.

For people who want to have e.g. 100W+ of power while feeding a signal to 4K60+ external monitors it's kind of a nightmare unless they know that "just use Thunderbolt 4" "trick".

While a bit of a tangent, I also love how Apple likes to make this EVEN MORE confusing by not supporting displayport MST in MacOS, causing most thunderbolt 4 docks on the market to be incapable of supporting multiple monitors when using MacOS.

So if you have say a 16" MacBook Pro, you need to get not only Thunderbolt 4 which is a rare spec, you want to ideally get ~85-140w PD not ~60w, AND you need to get an expensive dock that can split up the two HBR3 displayport channels instead of a regular MST Thunderbolt 4 dock.

Thankfully Apple has a solution to consumer confusion caused by all this. Buy a $1600 Apple studio display, connect it directly to your Mac, use the monitor itself as a dock, and everything will be compatible. Stay in the safe walled garden.

IF only USB had some sort of standard committee that could disallow that sort of thing…

It is true that Apple makes thunderbolt support more difficult. A 6 years old XPS 13 supports 3 monitors with TB3 while you meed an M1 Max to support that configuration.

Surprised Apple didn’t go with thunderbolt. I wonder if they are worried about Intel’s licensing or something. It seems more apple-like to go with the higher performance, more straightforward standard.

USB-C is a mess. Whoever decided to fix the annoying compatibility issues of USB mini/micro/blah blah by just solving the physical port problem should never be consulted on anything again.

EU compelled the USB C standard, apple had to switch. I for one am glad they did.

I mean... do you really need thunderbolt for a phone? Are you powering multiple 8k displays and daisey chaining a hub connected to an external raid storage array?

I get that it would be cool. For the ipad i think it makes sense to do that, but your phone...? Let's get real. Fast charging over a standardized cable with 10gbs transfer speeds is gonna be just fine.

the pro 14s and 15s are plenty fast and could be used as work horses for a lot (most office work I'd wager) with a KBM and an external display. the only issue is it'd be kinda hard to take calls without a headset, but that's a good reason to take your old iphone out of the drawer, right? ;)

The main use case I've heard is video transfers.

If you shoot videos longer than a few seconds on your iPhone, you will appreciate a way to get them off of your phone at a non-glacial pace.

For professionals shooting significant amounts of video, this is more than a convenience feature. Once your device's internal storage fills up with video, which does not take long at 4K60, now your "camera" is a paperweight until you can dump that footage.

Obviously, only a very small percentage of people are using their phones this way. But I think Apple really values that market.

Forcing people to buy $100 Thunderbolt cables just to charge their phones would not go over well

Not exactly my experience. I've owned a handful of USB-C devices, and there are devices from major manufacturers that will only charge from a USB-A to USB-C cable. No C-to-C cable convenience; you need to carry a Frankenstein C-to-A-to-C cable. Yes, Philips, this /is/ bullshit.

Such devices are not to spec, and check for this quality before purchase, and avoid products with fail to meet the spec. I've managed to avoid buying any products without C to C compatibilty.

This is largely what I'm talking about in the last paragraph of my post.

Sure, I'll check consumer goods are to spec before purchase, on that big list of USB C spec compliance that - checks notes - does not exist.

Also, having a portable M2 enclosure that you plug into USB-C that can transfer a terabyte in less than 10 minutes is pretty cool.