Why aren't motherboards mostly USB-C by now? (2021)
philip.greenspun.com
philip.greenspun.com
> Standard USB has a minimum rated lifetime of 1,500 cycles of insertion and removal, the Mini-USB receptacle increased this to 5,000 cycles, and the newer Micro-USB and USB-C receptacles are both designed for a minimum rated lifetime of 10,000 cycles of insertion and removal. [1]
> To accomplish this, a locking device was added and the leaf-spring was moved from the jack to the plug, so that the most-stressed part is on the cable side of the connection. This change was made so that the connector on the less expensive cable would bear the most wear. [1]
I suspect that would make it the responsibility of the cable, not the receptacle, to give you that satisfying feedback. Which is good, because the cable is much cheaper and easier to replace than the receptacle.
But then again, most people don't have the SMD rework tooling to be able to easily replace receptacles
This is mostly an exaggeration.
Apple has a $160 3m 40Gbps cable but Cable Matters has the same for $70 (and Trebleet has a 2.5m one for $50).
The 25 feet 40gbps cable from Pure Fi is the only I can think of that fits the "multiple hundreds' description at $200 but then again it's an active optical cable (it's not compatible with plain USB).
> the cap on the actual receptacle component is below $10 even for ones with support for higher speeds.
Maybe the actual C connector they started with is below $10 but you are looking at rather expensive redriver chips inside and careful engineering to care for the signal integrity at 40gbps.
A broken cable means the cable will be replaced, a broken connector might mean the device is thrown out.
Now I am a person with the skill and tools to replace such a connector or patch up the PCB in most cases, but Ibstill think I'd rsther replace the cable. Thebexpensive thing isn't the part. It is my time.
> But then again, most people don't have the SMD rework tooling to be able to easily replace receptacles
And that's exactly why a reasonable design assumes that buying a new cable will be the preferred option (over having to re-solder components on a device) by most consumers. It certainly is for me.
Have you ever seen a broken standard USB port or connector? Me not once in my entire life, unlike micro-USB or USB-C.
USB A has those lugs much larger and usually also bent under the board or twisted, so the connector isn't fixed into the PCB only by solder.
USB C and micro USB are mostly designed for clamshell enclosures such as a typical phone - in that case the connector shell is supported by the enclosure itself (ideally through some flexible padding) and not only by the flimsy contacts/solder lugs.
However, there are plenty of devices on the market where these connectors are not supported like that because the designer has been an idiot - and guess which devices end up in the landfill with broken off connectors the most.
Breaking the old school USB A, square USB B or mini USB is almost impossible like this unless one applies really unreasonable amount of force. I have only ever managed to accidentally destroy a USB A port once like that by accidentally hitting a USB stick hanging out of it - but the board and the adjacent ports were fine, only the port shell and contacts were destroyed.
By some definition, that’s evidence of unreasonable force, but it definitely happens and should be anticipated when you put the device in the hands of lots of gorillas.
You're saying this as though there's a single design of USB-C cable to board connector. There are, in fact, many different designs, including many with "lugs" which go through the board, as well as mid-mount connectors which use the material of the PCB as structural support.
Framework laptops come with expansion cards that are on sturdy rails and serve as the world-facing USB-C/A/HDMI/SD card/whatever connection. The inner connector on the mainboard is well protected.
https://frame.work/assets/pdp/expansion-card-9240577483dc9e2...
I basically have to replace my laptop to use my docking station just because usb c isn't sturdy enough :/
USB-A is so simple, two holes and some leaf springs make for a satisfying clunk that doesn't wear out so quickly.
I used to think the same thing, until I looked into how the USB-C plug actually operates: The movable spring parts are all in the cable, so if there's anything wearing out, it's usually that.
Clean the plug/port (lint collecting in the back of the port prevents a proper connection and makes the haptic feedback feel off), possibly swap out the cable if the springs in it are really worn out, and things are as good as new.
> some leaf springs make for a satisfying clunk that doesn't wear out so quickly.
But once they do, you have a broken USB port.
And yet, very nearly all of the USB-C connector breakage that I've experienced has been the socket-side, not on the cable.
Now PCB quality can also wildly differ and the bonding between substrate and pads can be a weak point if the manufacturer of the device went for the cheapest possible PCB. But for that you have through-hole USB-C connectors and cables that should break before the connector.
So if your USB-C connector breaks off the PCB that is on the manufacturer of the device.
Funny enough, I've never seen a micro or C break :D
People would complain about the price of the cables, the size of the cables, and the size of the devices.
Small is fragile, and fragile should be replaceable.
I just don't believe that those connectors last that long in the real world. My personal experience and observations indicate that they don't. Or, at least, they're much less robust than earlier USB connector designs.
USB-A has failed just as often as Micro-USB in my experience. The only connector I haven't seen break is USB-B, but that could be due to fewer samples, since only printers seem to use that connector, and how often do you unplug/plug a printer?
In more rental cars than not, the USB-A port is somewhat worn out, which is really annoying as it can make CarPlay connections quite fragile.
I've also seen many USB-A ports in airplanes not being able to hold the cable anymore due to the spring contacts being worn out or having been bent out of shape.
The USB industrial complex made the same claims with micro-USB vs mini-USB; and are now doing it again with Type-C.
My empirical evidence: I've now had to replace two laptop motherboards due to a (mechanically) failed USB-C port.
Guess what I haven't had to do in 25 years? Replace a failed USB-A socket. Ever.
USB-C connectors are fragile and companies are making more and more large, heavy cables with huge connectors especially common with Thunderbolt or port replicator-type devices. It is a recipe for disaster and they expect us to fall for this USB Jedi Mind Trick again.
We would also test how many miles a mouse would travel before the glides would wear out.
That's likely to be the exact reason why the reliability specs don't line up with reality: your test jigs are almost certainly going to be inserting the plugs directly with exact precision, whereas in practice people are going to just "jam it in" and apply significant side-loads as well as misalignment and levering forces.
It's not hard to design a connector that'll last 25k precisely aligned insertions by a test jig but will consistently fail after a few cycles of being mated by typical "hamfisted" users.
as someone who was involved with endurance/reliability testing of other physical products, I think you'd be surprised.
Randomized jitter and movement patterns are often replicated and considered.
Why assume that? Why not be humble and just ask the person with first hand knowledge instead of basically attacking their setup based on guessing?
Because for USB-A, the part that wears down is in the port, while for USB-C it's in the plug.
> If you attach a keyboard and throw it out of the window the usb A port will remain ok whereas the usb c port instantly gets damaged.
Have you tried that yourself, a statistically significant number of times?
I've had a number of USB-C ports break, I've never has a USB-A port break.
And I charge my phones in 99% of cases at home, stationary and undisturbed.
I’m definitely one of the few people lamenting Apple’s forced hand in moving to C on the iPhone. Lightning is incredible. It takes so much abuse and yet still fits like the day I bought the phone. Not looking forward to having to baby my phone’s port as well when I upgrade.
I should add that’s it’s not a perfect connector. Every lightening cable I’ve ever owned has eventually developed corrosion on the male connector, leading to spotty connection with the device. I’ve never had that problem with USB-A or C. Probably because the pins aren’t exposed, so aren’t ever touched by my sweaty/oily/acid fingers. That said, it’s usually a quick fix with some rubbing alcohol.
USB C is, in my experience, much more sensitive than USB-A to real-world usage.
I have had laptops with only USB-C ports since 2015 and not a single one failed. I also don't know anyone who had a broken USB-C port. There is probably variance between manufacturers.
My anecdote to add, but this time comparing USB-c power delivery with the lowly ~8mm barrel jack. I recently got a laptop shipped to me by a remote client to use to connect to their network. I pull it out of the box set it up and I notice the usb c power cable has the slightest of kinks...
Of course it wouldn't charge. I managed to manipulate the cable, holding it, pressing at various angles long enough to use the device until a replacement PSU was delivered. A barrel jack wouldn't care in the slightest about such kink. And if it didn't work I could get another barrel jack from an electronic parts store the same day, chop off the old one and solder the new one on. Good luck doing that with usb-c.
BTW, let me also rant here on the (lack of) usb-c PD compatibility even between devices made by the same manufacturer at the same time.
As the above was happening I happened to have another Dell xps laptop sitting on my desk with another usb-C power supply. I thought to myself, I'll just use one PSU for both, right? But before I tried my inate cynism made me think "surely they would not make it so convenient for us" so I googled if this is a good idea. Turns out no. The PSU I had was 90W while the other laptop required 120W. I read stories of it simply not working, but also of broken PSUs. I decided to try anyway and the laptop that needs 120W psu wouldn't even boot with the 90w PSU. I thought maybe it would throttle down the components. Nope, a bios message said, unplug it or else.
So yes, I agree the magnificent claims of usb c resolving all sorts of problems are all horseshit. The only real problem they really resolved is that it is reversible. Also the ideas of PD and sending eDP over it were good, just implemented poorly.
Of course something that needs 120w isn’t going to be able to be be powered by a 90w supply.
This is not a problem. Frankly it sounds like you don’t understand how electricity works.
I use the same USB-C GaN charger for all of my devices including MacBook Pro and Sony A7RIV. It’s 200W…
Just buy a big enough charger and you’re good.
That might be true for desktops (and even these could very well throttle their TDP based on available power), but most laptops I know can actually just supply the difference from their battery.
I personally just wouldn't get a laptop that can't run on a much more compact lower power wall adapter. Being able to use a tiny 20W power brick in a pinch is great.
e.g MacBooks of the 60W and 90W variety I've operated on 90, 60, 45, 30, 20, 15, and 5W chargers, car adapters, power banks, displays, powered hubs, or other USB PD devices. Of course on 5W they can't charge while in use (even idling, where they ~maintain charge) and booting requires them to have enough of a battery charge to support the boot power surge, but it has always worked: PD has always negotiated to the best power the charger could do. IOW when manufacturers do their job, it works.
> A barrel jack wouldn't care in the slightest about such kink.
Oh boy I would disagree. I've had decades of terrible experience with barrel jacks, many of which were completely invisible to the eye. I would not be surprised the small kink would have hidden much worse internal damage or defect. If it failed to negotiate power that's because of an abundance of safety, and I'd rather have that than a fire hazard silently being accepted and internally arcing under load.
> The PSU I had was 90W while the other laptop required 120W.
What would be the non USB PD alternative? Proprietary PSUs, with either one of: non interchangeable because of a different plug, the same plug but the most power hungry computer still refusing to boot from some proprietary charger id protocol or hardware, the same plug but different voltage and either doesn't work of fries the computer's power circuit (I've had all of those back in the day).
So your current USB-C situation isn't any worse than it was before USB PD existed. In fact it's better WRT failure modes because USB-C PD compliance means it will negotiate a safe voltage (including taking the cable into account). Of course if you plug in a non-compliant charger all bets are off but that's no worse than before when there was no power delivery standard whatsoever.
That said, as demonstrated by the MacBook example, a manufacturer doing their PD job would not lock the computer out at the bios level - instead waiting to have a safe charge on the battery -, a kind of locking that also happened back in the day of proprietary plugs among the same manufacturer.
Therefore I do not see any reason to blame that on USB PD "horseshit" instead of that particular manufacturer.
Most consumers can't solder, and I wouldn't even know where to find an electronic parts store. I can buy a (probably bad, but better than nothing in a pinch) USB-C cable at a convenience store on almost every street corner.
I'm more than happy to never have to deal with barrel jacks anymore. The inevitable drawer full of incompatible (at best) or physically compatible, but electrically mismatching barrel jack chargers has plagued too many households.
> I decided to try anyway and the laptop that needs 120W psu wouldn't even boot with the 90w PSU. I thought maybe it would throttle down the components. Nope, a bios message said, unplug it or else.
Seems like Dell does not care a lot about compatibility then. This is entirely allowed by the spec for good reasons: The alternative would be more barrel jacks, and at least I can use a Dell charger for my phone or laptop.
It's definitely not the norm – my laptops charge even from a 5W USB-C charger (albeit very, very slowly).
> So yes, I agree the magnificent claims of usb c resolving all sorts of problems are all horseshit.
I can definitely see how it doesn't solve all the problems all people have had with connectors, but it's solved all sorts of problems at least for me. I really like it.
But these PSUs haven't got any receptacle you can plug a replacement USB-c cable. On the brick side the cable goes into the brick. That's it.
Fair point about soldering and general rarity of electronic parts stores. If things remained as repairable as they were let's say 30 years ago you wouldn't need to know how to solder, but you would have an electronics store within a short driving distance where they'd solder the barrel jack on for you.
A common argument is, but everything is miniaturised now, to which I say, so what? Microscopes and bga rework equipment has been available for even hobbyist for quite some time.
USB-A connectors are robust enough that you can't really pull them out by the cable. You have to pull the connector, which means you always pull them straight out. USB-C cables are smaller so some people yank the wire part of the cable instead of the connector, leading to a shearing force on the socket, which breaks it over time.
Broken connector ports are pretty much always user error. If you're a bit more careful to pull things out straight the port won't fail for years.
After using GPIB connectors (with huge cables attached to them) for some time, i tend to dissagree.
The idea that micro-USB and USB-C are supposed to be equally durable is the wrongest thing I've read all day. Frankly, mini-USB is the single most delicate connector I've ever used. Other than a couple PDAs, I never owned a single mini-USB device those receptacle didn't end up breaking off the board.
Splitting them into separate paragraphs with your assessment and experience on each would help the legibility.
> The idea that micro-USB and USB-C are supposed to be equally durable is the wrongest thing I've read all day. Frankly, mini-USB is the single most delicate connector I've ever used. Other than a couple PDAs, I never owned a single mini-USB device those receptacle didn't end up breaking off the board.
What do the second and third sentences have to do with the first sentence? They read like they’re supposed to provide the (otherwise completely missing) support for your statement that it’s the “wrongest thing you’ve read all day”, but they don’t.
Also, rated lifetime does not take into account things like tugging the cable to the side of your PC because your foot got tangled in it.
USB C is extremely fragile due to its size and not much can be done to help it.
USB C might be created to withstand more insertion cycles. After all it is meant to be used for devices like phones that are plugged in and out constantly. Part of this improvement is just more experience creating connectors (yes, connectors got much better in the past decades).
A cable connected to a back of PC is not being constantly plugged in and out. Nobody I know is plugging in their keyboard or mouse multiple times a day.
--
When I design my boards, I put connectors that match the size of the board. I don't put extremely tiny connectors on a very large and massive project. I want a connector that isn't too fragile for the project and this means matching it with the forces that you can expect.
We, humans, use different forces when around large objects than when we are around small objects.
Large PC standing on your desk means forces used around it will be potentially larger than forces around a small appliance like a phone. If you tug on a cable that is hooked up to the phone, only small force is needed to move the phone. And we are usually more careful around a small appliance like phone. If you tug on a cable that is hooked up to a PC, much larger force will be needed before you move the PC. And people are less careful and using larger forces when doing things around a PC -- a larger object than a phone.
Really? How is e.g. the HDMI connectors "better" than the VGA connectors? VGA connectors seems far more robust to me. Same with d-sub mouse connectors.
I guess the signal rating is better now but the old ones didn't need high frequency capabilities.
I am writing this on a screen where the HDMI connector pops out if a even touch it.
Just one more reason to switch to DisplayPort. The only downside of DisplayPort over VGA is that it's up to the connector model if it locks, not user input; but other than that DisplayPort seems clearly superior over VGA. Apart from the obvious signal improvements, slightly more compact design and the recessed port, even an non-locking cable sits far more securely than an unsecured VGA cable.
I don't know if this was to prevent people disconnecting things, or if the expectation was that once connected, things should stay that way for years.
But becoming loose without unpluging isn't good either.
USB-C doesn't have this issue. Much better
> tugging the cable to the side of your PC because your foot got tangled in it.
> USB C is extremely fragile due to its size and not much can be done to help it.
The USB-C housing is much more rigid than that of type A, so it should handle this much better. The thinner bar might also handle deflection better by virtue of flexibility.
Also, hardware engineers know that ports are operated by drunk gorillas. Incorrect usage and odd forces are considered when designing a physical interface.
I generally know very well how to take care of electronics and those ports never experienced that dreaded 'vertical tug' you describe, at least to my knowledge.
P.S. I am not a shill for Fractal, but a faithful owner.
Plus planning to build new desktop soon, I'll still probably go with them (Define 7 is my pick so far), I think I had just bad luck since they have quite solid reputation and most other cases are not to my taste or needs.
Meanwhile I have a USB-C to USB-A multi-dongle to which I have connected my mouse and keyboard and I move the whole thing between the work and private laptop on a daily basis and despite that after three years only the plug part is showing signs of wear. The socket is fine.
Same goes for the charge port in my phone. Still works as advertised even though I went through a few cables in those six years since I bought it.
Side note: I too wish this brand guaranteed quality. I have two Fractal Design cases, a Define R6 and an Era. The former is quite good, the latter is crap - panels don't fit. Btw, they cost the same (fucking expensive).
Compared to magsafe it is not recessed (though that has not been an issue in my experience), but on the plus side it also does data, video and is universal. Currently using the same type of adapter for my laptop, phone and tablet with the ends on various chargers and docking stations.
They had tendency to cause sparking and I lost at least one phone due to it. The phone was fine but it lost ability to be charged through the USB port. And because it did not have wireless charging, when the battery ran out it became an expensive brick.
Put 20 V Vbus on a CC line and see what happens.
I do not know if the new MagSafe is an improvement over V1 and v2, but solid connections or non-contact charging are the way to go.
The insertion cycles are only for proper insertion.
Proper? Please. Why not just say that the connector suffers from poor design and is difficult to plug correctly. Everything else is humiliating the average user, like my parents, with advanced degrees whom are not STEM.
If you securely store a laptop at the end of each workday then you're up to 1 cycle per day minimum. It will be more than that if you're required to secure the laptop during coffee breaks and/or if you work from several places in a work-day.
USB-C solved this by demanding thick walls on every side of the cable's connector.
Not arguing that this isn't a good idea, but considering that the A port looks gigantic compared to C it seems those springs being a couple times larger also makes them a lot more durable, to the point where it's a non-issue.
And I've never ever seen a usb-a port break or the cable connector part.
This doesn't make sense to me. Why should it be bigger?
Think the mushy feel is due to the io plate on the mobo
why do I have to think of solutions so obvious?
Of course, no one wants a big connector in their cell phone, so we’ll have to make a mini C. And then a micro C. And then they’ll make USB D to try to simplify all of these competing standards.
That said the form factor of type C is a little too small to be wieldy to me.
[1]: https://tripplite.eaton.com/main/search?q=reversible%20usb%2...
Nowadays I'm very careful when plugging in USB-C, doing my best to not pull on the cable, etc. It's overall a worse UX than with USB-A, and being reversible doesn't make up for it.
Then you have the mess of protocols and standards that use the connector, where I need to use specific cables for specific devices, and I'm never sure which one is which. The term "universal" in USB has completely lost its meaning.
Then you’ll need to only care about the wattage rating when charging devices. Seems like future for me.
Both will continue to go up.
The pins are specified for 1.25A each yielding 5A and I believe the 5A cable specification came at the same time as 20V with the 100W power delivery specification.
Every power increment since then has been a voltage rather than current increment.
That means it goes up to 48V DC, so that's certainly curious, thanks!
Broke my light macbook air from being so tightly connect it dropped, macbook also had very short charger cables for a while.
While being so tight it often refuse to charge because of it being so good in collecting dust and having a long neck that makes a small hit bend it so it doesn't work.
I've taken to using Volta plugs for all my USB devices at the device side to prolong the life of their ports, and it's great for unifying micro USB, Lightning, and USB-C onto one cable. Highly recommend them!
That said I agree USB-C connectors on desktop motherboards are particularly poorly made, and indeed make an unsatisfying connection.
[^1]: https://jlcpcb.com/partdetail/ShouHan-10_0_4C6_3ZB/C6386909
[^2]: https://jlcpcb.com/partdetail/Dealon-USB_TYPE_C018/C2927038
Everyone arguing against c like they wanna go back to old style serial port connectors or something.
> if someone exceeds the plug/unplug rating or the socket breaks for some other reason...it can just be repaired.
...when consumer tech companies these days tend to make repair much more difficult than it used to be.
Usb-c just fits.
Do you mean the real USB plug the bigger one? Those are dependent on my device. The USB a port on my desktop case are okay, the ones at the back of my Mainboard way to tight.
I've asked for some "Cable Matters" ones to be bought as that's a brand I recognise and _think_ is good, we'll see!
I'd like a Framework style swappable USB charging port already.
the thing is, we could just have both! this isn’t some winner/loser scenario. the real question should be why these computers with enough bandwidth for 11+ connectors don’t at least split the difference with 6/5 of each. gives device manufacturers enough confidence that customers will be able to plug in the thing they bought, and gives consumers the ability to plug in anything and everything they need. then in 5 years when things have advanced we can start talking about entirely consolidating on USB C.
We are slowly getting there.
Very high end devices might have more than a single USB-C port (which is probably your case, given the "extreme" in the name), and these ports might even be Thunderbolt or USB4, but that's still rare. In my opinion, we are still in the USB-C equivalent of the "only two USB 2 ports, if you want more get a PCI add-on card" phase we had in the serial/parallel/PS2 to USB migration back in the day.
my current wireless mouse/wired keyboard have usb-c on the peripheral end but I still use usb-a to connect them to the computer
Ex. From my comment, GP is the comment by pynappo, starting with "i think the GP was talking... "
Similarly, you can have GGP for great-grand parent, etc.
OP refers either to the starter of the post or the top level comment.
USB-C erased that distinction in favor of a full duplex network connection between two hosts.
And USB-C is neither full-duplex (at least not for USB 2) nor host-to-host; there is a protocol negotiation and some devices can never act as hosts, although some can indeed assume both host and device roles.
Even in a “host-to-host connection”, only one side will act as the host.
In the same sense that A and B are variants of each other, sure.
Even though it's called micro-B, the design is closer to A, and micro supports both ends with basically the same plug. I would never refer to it as just "B". "B" means the square plug.
I wasn't being pedantic though. USB-B is in my experience used to refer to the square plug (commonly found in printers). Micro-USB seemed like a closer approximation to what I though that poster was referring to.
I can confirm, it's a journey. It's the same kind of journey than finding a hair trimmer that charges on USB C.
I see it more as makers being complacent and not giving a fuck though. There's no technical reasons for those to be USB A, and the USB C ones work great.
So yes USB A will be there for a while, and more often than not it's a symbolic middle finger to the buyer, a signal that a product should probably be avoided.
You have exceptionally strong opinions about USB A and C.
I kinda hate that we're stuck in dongle town for so long now. And going wireless brings in the charging issues. Computer makers are also to blame, but I think that ship has sailed.
maybe it’s the opposite, it’s a warm hug reassuring you that they’re not going to change things just because some of the cool kids are.
There's a good technical reason for keyboards and mice to still be USB A: adapters from USB A socket to USB C plug are allowed by the standard, but adapters from USB C socket to USB A plug are forbidden (because they would, together with a common USB C cable, allow creating the forbidden USB A to USB A cable). This means that USB A keyboards and mice can be used in both USB A ports and (with a simple passive adapter) USB C ports, while USB C keyboards and mice could be used only on USB C ports.
Therefore, until having enough free USB C ports in computers is common enough, using USB A ports (with an optional adapter to USB C on the box) on the keyboard or mouse makes sense. This is similar to how, during the transition from serial and PS/2 mice to USB mice, it was common for them to come with a adapter which allowed them to be used either on a USB port or (with the adapter) on a PS/2 port.
You don't say...
Not hard to do this regardless. Amazon sells A-to-A cables[0]; and Unicomp keyboards for example have a USB-A port in the back, and connect to PCs with a bundled A-to-A cable. Seems like preventing this is a lost cause.
[0] https://www.amazon.com/Monoprice-1-5ft-24AWG-Cable-Plated/dp...
For mice, having a hardwired cable probably still makes sense in terms of bulk and strain relief, but I suspect that wireless mice are also far more common.
Except that all of their plans already have USB A in them. They'd have to rework the plans. Then, rework the lines making them. Then they'd have 2 versions for a period of time. Someone in accounting and logistics would have to do more work.
Seems like a perfect time to bring that conversation to a halt with the "if it's not broke, don't fix it" line.
If a PC ships with mostly USB C ports. Well since the majority of accessories are A users are going to be frustrated when they need adapters/a hub to plug in anything because they don't have enough of the ports accessories actually use.
If accessories shift first then users are going to be frustrated when they need adapters or a hub to have enough ports to plug in their accessories.
Remember that the average user keeps a computer for 6 years and they keep accessories longer often throwing things out when they literally stop working or can't be made to work with their new device.
Furthermore even a slight increase in costs is problematic when you margins are fairly razor thing. It's a really hard sell for anyone to move forward.
Apple has a substantial advantage here wherein they have enough good will from their users, enough margin, and enough sway to simply upgrade and tell their users to buy adapters while neither losing profit nor users.
That being said being A is hardly a middle finger for the vast majority of devices which need neither more power/more speed than usb 3.2 2x1 can provide as we are talking about 10Gbps and 15W. The most common accessories are mouse,keyboard,sound,cameras,small storage, less commonly network adapters
We haven't yet found a compelling case for a beefy connection but surely there is right.
High end video capture, high end storage, displays, hubs that serve many fast devices, 10Gbps Ethernet.
None as common as the previously listed and not fun to get working when not every port supports high power, higher speed, or optional features nor every cord. Using such features feels like the plug and pray of the early 90s whereas plugging in a DisplayPort monitor or a standard stereo jack speaker system is as boring as plugging in a toaster.
Many common power plugs were standardized 50-100 years ago. Compared to them, even USB-A is still new. If all you need is power delivery, there is little reason to switch to yet another plug type, which only exists because of unrelated requirements in other industries.
But I'd think that the budget, off-the-shelf keyboards would be USB A.
When it comes to the entire ecosystem, a $5 bargain-bin noname OEM keyboard with permanently-attached cable is more representative - and those definitely don't come with USB-C yet. That would probably add a few cents to their BOM, so it simply isn't worth it yet.
Throwing away a perfectly good device because the cable is kaputz exacerbates our e-waste problem
> I challenge the author to go find a wired keyboard or mouse that comes with a USB C plug. it’s possible, but not easy.
where they do specially call out keyboards
As for the ones that are sideways: the 'bottom' of the case is the bottom of the motherboard, so if you think of it that way it might still work for all but the top side ones.
I'm at a point in my life where I've just given up and figure that I'm only going to get it right 1/3rd of the time anyway: Nope, turn; nope, turn; yup.
Google is usually pretty good about their USB-C implementations.
Definitely not googles finest device.
https://global.discourse-cdn.com/boingboing/original/4X/9/6/...
After a nap I actually did put on headphones and plug them into the power socket by mistake. Luckily nothing happened.
As far as I understand, not all US power outlets have a residual current device.
So, no?
Don't put shit in the wrong hole is really one of the most basic lessons we should teach people in life.
https://www.pcgamer.com/youre-telling-me-we-could-have-had-r...
I built my own based on a USB 2.0 hub IC, but I never got around to publishing the design files. I should get on that!
Even building a single prototype unit cost me about the same as a single off-the-shelf type-C hub, but of course, building subsequent units would be substantially cheaper.
Meanwhile the most frequent complaint I read about USB-C is trickster/confusing cables or hubs because they don’t support everything
1: the four USB-C ports it provides aren’t enough for my use; one is occupied by Apple’s USB-C DAC (the Framework’s 3.5mm port is unusably noisy with my Shure IEMs). Then add my charger, tethered iPhone, and a peripheral like a mouse or drawing tablet, and you can see why I need a hub.
P.S. if you did release the files and it was a reasonably affordable DIY project (e.g some soldering and assembly), I’d love that. Although I guess you’d need to buy a fair number of all the components to bring the price down.
I've also noticed there are next to no usb-c hubs, apart from "docks" that usually do many more things are bigger. But, don't they have to provide the specced power to be "compliant"?
What I find annoying is that even "higher end" docks don't have many usb-c ports. I'm typing this through a HP dock that has a big-ass power adaptor and is quite big and heavy itself (has a huge heatsink), yet it still provides only one usb-c port. At least it seems to implement PD (I can charge a laptop through the downstream port), even though I think it only provides 15W.
I prefer USB-A for FIDO authenticators for that reason (and because the plug is more robust for USB-A and basically indestructible; C plugs can and do get bent on a keychain).
It’s have seen multiple crushed USB A connectors.
In the early days of USB before flash drives were common, I was convinced such a cable would let me connect two PCs together to transfer data. Spent some time looking around in stores before a kind sales rep advised they did not exist.
Plot twist: they do exist, but not like you would expect. Unlike the forbidden USB A to USB A cable (which connects together the power supplies on both ends), there's a special debug-only USB A to USB A cable, which connects only the USB 3 pairs (and leaves both power and the USB 2 pair disconnected). Of course, that cable is useless unless you know how to put one of the devices in the special debug mode (and know which of the USB ports is the correct one, since AFAIK this debug mode usually works on only of the USB ports).
If a mouse or keyboard or thumb drive expects to be used by an apple computer, or a phone, usb-c is the right answer. If it wants to be plugged into a PC, usb-a is a better choice.
USB-C instead of any flavor of USB-B makes a ton of sense, and everyone should adopt that, but USB-C instead of USB-A is a little soon for PC oriented products, IMHO. Wait a few years, or ship with an adapter.
If this were 2008 you would definitely call a parallel port, a 56k modem, or a floppy drive a relic even though you probably used one in 1998.
Consider this exercise: The Nintendo Switch is the third best-selling console of all time. Walk me through how you would design it if the only port was USB-A.
The only issue the parallel port, 56k modem, and floppy disk share in common is throughput. This isn't a problem with USB-A compared to USB-C (until USB 4.0 becomes mainstream).
Most of the USB user base doesn’t care about that nerdy stuff.
My current car is almost 17 years old, and was bought used last year to replace the 20 year old car that I totaled. I certainly can't afford most cars with any USB ports, and wouldn't want them if I could.
Are car USB ports used for anything other than smart phones?
That’s really the crux of my point. USB-C is the “winner” because it’s ubiquitous in the smartphone and tablet world (especially now with full adoption from Apple underway).
Cars are also a piece of technology that does a frat job representing the lowest common denominator of the average consumer’s relationship with technology. If your brand new $2,500 MacBook Pro doesn’t have a CD player, that doesn’t mean the CD is dead. It’s an expensive early adopter’s device. But if your brand new Toyota Corolla base model doesn’t have a CD player, that means it’s DEAD.
There’s also the answer to the question “what’s the most likely cable I have on me?” If you have an Android or Apple phone from the past 5 years you don’t have any rectangular USB-A cable with you in your travel bag.
I would also argue that the average person has very little practical use for USB for a lot of its data transfer capabilities anymore. The average person who owns a laptop probably never plugs in anything to the port besides things they are charging or maybe a mouse dongle.
It’s expected that your car (and most people’s cars) are older, but what I’m saying is that the fact that someone buying a new car doesn’t get USB-A pretty much shows us that it’s not long for this world if not dead already.
Sure, my desktop still has plenty of USB-A ports since space is not at a premium and nerdy custom builders demand them. But if you buy a desktop computer from Apple it doesn’t have any, and PC OEMs like HP and Dell won’t be far behind.
The only thing I’ve used the USB ports on my desktop for are mouse dongles and a fingerprint scanner. Basically, ~$20 disposable tech that would work perfectly fine as a USB-C version. My keyboard has already made the switch to USB-C and my mouse charges with USB-C as well, and I bought these items multiple years ago.
That said I do own lots of usb-a devices and will continue to own them for the foreseeable future. I would not purchase a laptop that was usb-c only today.
USB-C to charge it, but dongle is A now that you mention it. It stays plugged into the back of my monitor.
My Moonlander Mk1 does, it has C-to-C cable with an optional C-to-A adapter on one end. My mouse is type C, but it comes with C-to-A cable.
But, obviously, this is chicken-and-egg kind of a problem. No one will build a cheap mass market keyboard with a C-to-C cable for a market (desktop computer users) where type C connectors are nearly non-existent. Extra components (adapters or extra cables) won't be worth it. If the majority of desktops will shift to have majority of their ports of type C, you won't find a type A keyboard anymore. Just like you will have some difficulty finding a PS/2 keyboard today (sure they exist, but aren't exactly widespread anymore).
Not sure I'd rely on keyboards as the standard bearer for 'not a relic' many of them still support PS/2 via passive adapter. That was announced in 1987 and is older than me.
The issue of type C is that it's trying to accommodate the entire spectrum of applications from very high bandwidth to very low cost. The range of possibilities has much increased since when Universal Serial Bus was devised, thus many recent solutions feel like they're bad at everything and good at nothing. Perhaps we should allow the specialization of type A as a cheap, reliable, slow, high power, connector, and save type C for only when high throughput is needed?
Well not because it's old, I'm a huge fan of my 1/8" headphone jack.
Type C is intentionally significantly more functional (not to mention the ergonomics of reversibility) but also fully backwards-compatible requiring only passive routing to get you a Type A adapter.
> The issue of type C is that it's trying to accommodate the entire spectrum of applications from very high bandwidth to very low cost.
That's up to the host. You can support just USB 2.0 with the same signals routed as a vanilla type A connector.
There's even super cheap USB-C receptacles that only have the relevant USB 2.0 pins routed out. Like this one [1].
There's really no reason I can think of not to use one.
[1] https://www.digikey.ca/en/products/detail/gct/USB4125-GF-A/1...
It's just that these reasons seem so inconsequential to me. There's stuff like type C needing two extra resistors even for USB 2.0. Being able to adapt between connectors is also BS in my opinion because you can convert anything between anything if you really wanted to. And if you only use USB HS speeds, you'll just waste connect lifetime of your expensive higher-specced cable. Sure, you can get 2.0 only type C cables, but why? I think there's no good reason to use USB-C besides high bandwidth purposes. Barrel jacks or supply power better. All our normal peripheral devices aren't consuming exponentially more bandwidth anytime soon.
If you don’t need the bandwidth, good for you. The rest of us choose modernity and nice things like, USB-C hard drives, network adapters, etc…
USB-A is not a connector, it’s a whole spec. You can’t get the same performance out of that connector as you can a USB-C connector.
I just assumed there aren't enough lines/pins in a USB-A connector for it to work.
A quick search gives me https://www.tomshardware.com/news/usb-3-2-explained which supports that experience (USB-A is not listed under 20Gbps).
https://dcrwheels.co.uk/custom-wheelsets/building-with-woode...
"Ghisallo have been making rims since the 1940s"
So let’s see . . . I have the following in my house, most are at least 2 years old and all are USB-C :
MacBook Air
MX3 mouse
Keychron keyboard
iPhone 15
iPad Air
Xbox controllers (several)
LG 4K monitor
Racer Headphones
Rode VideoMic Go II
Pebble V2 speakers
GoPro 11
Chromebook laptop
All my client devices have detachable cables. All my host devices are USB-C and have been for a while, except for a) Xbox, b) RPis, c) Car.
a) I rarely plug anything into it except a dedicated charging cable or the odd Xbox-specialized devices.
b) for which client devices (if any) are never unplugged
c) A cable is plugged in and never leaves the port
For general-use client devices I either swapped cables for USB-C to uUSB-A or USB-B or had USB-C OOTB for recent devices, increasingly so on both ends.
I also recently moved from an iPhone 7 to an iPhone 13 Mini. If it wasn't for Apple refusing to do an iPhone 15 Mini I'd be USB-C all around.
> I challenge the author to go find a wired keyboard or mouse that comes with a USB-C plug.
Accepted: I've had both for over a year: Keychron K2, Keychron M1. Logitech has a lot of devices with USB-C client side.
The irony is that one of them came with a USB-A (host side) to USB-C (client side) cable. The other one was C-C with a "upgrade your computer connector" C-A adapter†.
> Then in 5 years
Huh. I've been going all in on USB-C since 2018, my strategy being to pick the new standard through and through and backport/polyfill USB-C on the USB-A host side† as needed, NOT the other way around.
It's absolutely ridiculous that any off-the-self device today has anything else than a USB-C port client-side (which is where most of the mess actually is with all the mini x micro x hispeed x A x B x HDMI x DP connectors). I'm not throwing away any pre-C device or cable, I upgrade existing cables to be USB-C††. If a cable fails I get a C-whatever replacement.
As far as I'm concerned USB-A/B is a relic. Folks cling onto it like they clung to VGA (then, and now HDMI), floppy or optical drives.
† Upgrade the host port by leaving this permanently in the host device port: https://www.amazon.com/UGREEN-Adapter-Female-Converter-Charg...
†† Upgrade the cable by leaving this on the cable: https://www.amazon.com/UGREEN-Adapter-Thunderbolt-Compatible...
Not the author, but all my Logitech keyboards have USB-C.
Calling established technologies "legacy" and "relic" despite them being widely adopted and used should be recognized as the manipulative intellectual dishonesty that it is.
USB-C is an extraordinarily flexible connector and is super backwards-compatible. If you wanted to provide the exact same support as a USB A port, it's not any more complex. Just finer pitch to solder, but not any finer than anything else on the motherboard.
An A to C cable is also entirely passive. I think it's ok to rely on them. The future is now, time to move on. It's been 27 years.
If I found out (some of) the USB-C ports on my mb were limited to USB 2.0 speed and power I’d be quite pissed.
The real reason is bandwidth.
While I'm in favor of USB-C connector eventually replacing USB-A connector completely, I think it's best done gradually, with new devices still offering the occasional USB-A socket for quite some time. Remember how slowly PS/2 ports disappeared from PCs which also featured USB sockets next to them, or how PCI and PCIe coexisted for many years on PC motherboards.
Edit: don't believe me? https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z790-AORUS-TACHYON-rev-...
1 x PS/2 keyboard port
1 x PS/2 mouse portHopefully if they ever go away for good someone makes a pcie ps/2 card with proper interrupts (if that is even possible behind abstractions like MSI) rather than converting ps/2 to usb
My Thinkpad T14 has one USB-C port which works best for charging (also handles Ethernet and slow-speed stuff), and another that works best with an external 4K display. All else is USB-A. But I bought it for $500 used. A used Mac Pro 2019 is like $2500, to say nothing about a new one.
Early on maybe 8 or nine years ago I would have made a similar argument as you are now, but it’s been quite awhile even mice and keyboards come standard with usbc now.
Isn't this basically everyone?
I can count on one hand the number of times I've seen something that plugs into type C and it's not either a phone charger or a type A adapter.
By way of comparison, my experience is basically the opposite. Most of USB devices I have attached to my computers are USB-C - my keyboard, local backup disks and non-perf critical mass storage, my yubikeys, one of my monitors, network dongles. Most of the USB-A things I have around are for recharging stuff, plus old external disks I keep out of paranoia, and, things like my car's ports for connecting my phone for CarPlay.
The last one is something that annoys me about the EU's insistence on USB-C for phones. I had a bunch of perfectly serviceable USB-A to lightning cables to discard because the connectors have changed for no benefit to me. It seemed driven more by dogmatism than any practical advantages in real life. None of the shit I need to plug the phone into changed their connectors, so I just need to replace cables for no good reason.
Can't you just give them to the person who is inheriting/buying your previous phone?
Ain't broke, don't fix it. They will fade away eventually.
I have literally tens of devices with usb A to usb B/mini/micro etc. cables, and only a few that have usb C, and even most of those came with a usb A -> usb C cable.
USB A is far from dead and should stay... I don't want to live in an "apple-like world", where you need an adapter for everything that should be included directly in the first place (lika an USB A port!!). And I already have to buy a serial (rs232) adapter, because they removed it for no real reason.
RS-232 is a pain, it's one of the few users of negative voltages on a PC (others being ISA cards and PCI cards; PCI Express finally removed the last negative voltage pin), and the input needs to be tolerant of any voltage between -25V and +25V. I can see why computer manufacturers would love to not have to deal with it anymore.
It’s way better than plugging every device into the back of your PC anyway.
When a USB-C port is out in space, rather than flat on a desk, C-to-A adapters create a lever arm that increases the risk of damage. Though this can be solved by using adapters with ~100mm of wire in the middle.
Meanwhile USB C goes up to 240W. You're probably never going to get that directly out of a motherboard.
False. USB-BC allows up to 1.5A, or 15W and doesn't require usb-c
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_hardware#USB_battery_charg...
If you know of any controllers that implement the spec, I'm very interested in knowing part numbers! If for no other reason than as a historical curiosity.
I can't really think of why an average user would want one other than gaming, and PC gamers can likely figure out USB cables.
In other words, it costs more.
[1] https://richardg867.wordpress.com/2020/02/29/usb-c-done-chea...
They’ve got a choice between doing nothing and having a few people complain, or doing a bunch of work and spending a bunch of money and still having people complain. One of those is a lot easier.
On Macs, USBC ports are used for both Thunderbolt and various USB protocols.
1. USB-C is more technically complicated, especially when you want to create a host, and especially when you want to do anything faster than USB 2 speeds. Fully-integrated chips for USB-C are still quite rare, so you have to hook up a handful of different not-exactly-cheap chips to add a USB-C port. On the other hand, USB-A is pretty trivial and can be added at basically zero cost.
2. There's still a wide USB-A ecosystem out there. Having to use adapters suuuucks, so people want to have at least some USB-A ports in their system. Moreover, a lot of more-trivial peripherals feature USB-C ports rather than pigtails, so you can easily connect them to USB-A ports with A-to-C cables.
The balance will slowly shift towards USB-C, but it's not exactly surprising that USB-A is still quite common.
Pros:
- incredibly durable; in the first week I had it, it slipped out of my pocket and was run over by a car, screen side down. No lasting damage aside from a few marks on tne glass
- headphone jack
- expandable storage
- removable battery
- dock-rechargable (which makes up for its lack of wireless charging)
- pretty clean android skin, cleaner even than my Pixel (which had a nonremovable google search box)
- has 3 programmable buttons, each with two options, so you can have hardware that launches your most used/time-sensitive apps. I have one mapped to Shazam, for example.
Cons:
- pretty big
- cant remove some samsung apps
- not a great camera or flashlight
Overall i would definitely buy another!
However, they do indeed feel quite a lot more fragile. USB-A is an absolute tank, and I regularly just haphazardly plug it in without paying much attention to it, knowing that I'm not going to damage it. With USB-C I'm always a bit careful about not putting too much strain on the connector - especially as most connectors are rather long and act like a lever!
I can totally see myself breaking off USB-C ports because I forget to unplug the cable to my docking station. With USB-A, I pretty much expect to break the cable first.
It might seem that way, but the port supposedly breaks more easily than the cable in USB-A, since the A port contains springs (which will eventually get worn out and can be bent).
Anecdotally, I've seen tons of broken A ports with exactly that failure in airplanes, buses, and other places with public USB charging ports that people don't treat particularly nicely.
The leverage of C plugs does seem scary, but I have yet to encounter a broken port – fingers crossed!
Go look at phone charging cables which you might want to plug in to your laptop and see that C-C is more common than C-A now.
I think it's great for travel, combined with an Anker 737 or similar battery and Anker 736 100W charger.
Still mad at Apple for removing USB-A. I understand adding USB-C. Why remove them??
Apple has been at it since the dawn of time.
The biggest difference between USB-A and floppy/CD/DVD drive is the network effect. USB-A is an interface between 2 devices, so its usefulness is measured as an O(N^2). It allows all my laptops to connect to any of my peripherals. To replace USB-A, I would need to replace all my laptops and all my peripherals. A floppy drive, on the other hand, is an O(N) device for the most part. Its usefulness is mostly limited to the single device that it is installed. (Sure, floppy disks are shared between computers, but I would say that this is a less frequent use-case.)
The other difference between USB-A and floppy is that the USB-A is "good enough" for almost all use cases. My keyboard, mouse, flash drives, USB-ethernet adapters, all work perfectly fine with USB-A. In contrast, going from a floppy to a CD increased the capacity by 1000X. From CD to a flash drive, we got another factor of 10X to 100X. And much faster random access. A floppy became "NOT good enough" very quickly.
I see USB-A existing for the foreseeable future, the next 10-20 years, because of the network effect, because it is good enough for most things, and because it is slightly cheaper than USB-C.
You can get those USB A-C plug adapters for $1-2 a pop. Stick one on the end of each peripheral cable, now they are all USB-C.
PCs aren't in the power delivery game and don't really need an extra video output.
Meanwhile, USB 3 over a USB A socket is still able to transfer 500 MB/sec of data - I just did this earlier today, copying from an old M2 SSD in an enclosure to my new upgraded installed SSD. That's pretty quick.
USB C could double it, but how often do you need 1 GB/sec? Not many flash drives can deliver that outside of SSDs in enclosures.
Machines should have more C ports even if they have to share controller lanes--rarely would anyone be in a situation to saturate the system but being able to have multiple devices plugged in at once is useful.
I'd be perfectly happy with an internal USB C hub--but I have never seen such a thing. (I *do* have an internal USB 3 hub. Same issue--the convenience of multiple ports, I don't need the bandwidth of them having their own controller lanes.)
Not in my experience. The last few times I went to try to use one of my USB-C peripherals it was a pain. For example I wanted to use my portable external monitor with my laptop. Both are "USB-C" however the issue is that USB-C describes the physical connector and not much else. I already new my laptop supported DisplayPort Alt Mode and I knew that was what the display was expecting (rather than being USB display adapter). However, I then ended up digging through the box of USB-C cables testing them until the third cable I tried lit the screen up. This was the general experience with my Thunderbolt M.2 interface as well. I don't have much that takes uses PD but as I understand that's yet another dimension of permutations.
Without intimate knowledge of both devices /and/ the cable it's hard to say what any combination of "USB-C" parts will do. Even OEMs fail to get this right. I friend recently told me of buying Dell laptops which offered a dock as an option. Unfortunately, the dock expected Thunderbolt & DP MST while the laptop only supported USB3.
My personal opinion is that the relative lack of USB-C in a highly competitive, consumer market like DIY Motherboards is likely because even after 10 years the consumer demand is just not there. When judged the more lofty aspirations of USB-C that are being expressed here (replacing most if not all USB-A, HDMI, DP, Thunderbolt, and lower wattage power cables), I consider USB-C to be a failure.
Windows 10 runs acceptably on a Core 2 Duo with 4 GB of RAM - this was my son's gaming PC until a couple of months ago. (It did have an SSD, though - a mechanical hard drive would certainly have reduced the snappiness.)
A pdf for example can be very small but then take up considerably more memory to display an embedded image once it’s done decompressing for render. Similarly text is more expensive just by virtue of higher resolution displays.
What we ask of our machines has expanded greatly, and the immediacy with which people want things to load is more exacting too, so a lot of content is kept warm in memory.
I’m not saying 4GB is a healthy amount and I agree there’s likely room for optimization, but let’s not also act like there aren’t huge advances in what computers do to necessitate that either
Yes, compressed content can take up more bits when uncompressed. Also, compression can’t reduce size beyond what information is actually there without losing that information somehow. Just because we are not good at working with compressed content and require a lot of RAM to deal with raw/uncompressed data doesn’t mean it’s not wasteful or even that it’s the only way to do it.
I’m glad you agree we have come a long way too. Perhaps as we collectively go further, we will find ways of accomplishing even more with fewer resources.
— written from a pocket sized computer with far more bits than the total number of humans that have ever existed
It was almost unusable in that very scenario. I could handle a couple of tabs, but once I opened a couple of extra tabs (e.g. some search either through Google or any local shops) it literally hanged. I had to wait for it (to swap, I suppose) for a couple of minutes to unfreeze.
I went very angry over time and replaced the weird incompatible with Linux component (GPU) for another one and now it runs Fedora 39 with default Gnome 45 installed. It works perfectly well and it hangs only when I open relatively big number of tabs, 15 to 20, which is a lot for the use-case of that very machine. I thought of optimising the machine to run just swaywm (which eats like 300 MB compared to over 2GB of Gnome), but I never faced any issue for over a 3 months period.
So I would confirm that even 4 GB is plenty unless you need a big number of browser tabs opened. But not with Windows. Windows was usable on that machine if you don’t use browser heavily, but very very lightly.
Almost everything that has a usb-c connection can easily be connected with a c to a connector.
My laptop, on the other end, everything I use is usb-c, and everything that’s not is usb-c though a multi-port adapter.
My pet-peeve: If you want more than a single NIC in an AMD-based small form factor, your options are extremely limited. Even if you're open for importing and paying >$300 for just the board or going a couple of generations back. Meanwhile, you have a plethora of options in the exploding segment of NUC-like mini-PCs. There's almost nothing on the market in-between firmware-roulette Chinese mini-PCs and effectively ATX-sized breakout-rigs. Asrock RACK (with scarce availability) is the only exception I can think of over the past 5y. I don't get it.
Dual NIC boards with AMD sockets does seem like a niche unfulfilled, though. There's some options on the Intel side though, something like ASRock Z690M-ITX/ax might work if you compromise on CPUs.
inb4: CPUs as well as commonly used chipsets have enough lanes, it's not that.
Either way, if you're using an APU then that frees up an x16 PCIe slot, which on many motherboards can be adapted into 4 M.2 slots. That should get you plenty of networking.
What's your goal here??? Multiple NIC in ITX form factor, for what?
Even Apple recognizes this, which is why the desktop Mac's still have a couple of USB-A ports.
(And most of the rest are Bluetooth, not USB-C!)
USB-C has its merits, but I think they are bigger on mobile devices where you only have a limited number of ports and they have to serve multiple roles. On a desktop, it's certainly nice to have a couple of USB-C ports, especially if they're USB4, but you also have dedicated ports for video, audio, etc, so the versatility isn't quite as valuable.
One thing that stuck out to me about the article is that the author didn’t talk much about their use cases with USB.
Yeah but you can put a $2 USB A-C adapter plug on the end of it and just leave it there
Only USB-A, no plug on the other side: keyboard, USB stick, Oculus Rift (CV1)
B/mini/micro on the other side: scanner, digitizer tablet, sound card
USB-C but shipped with USB-A to C cable: mouse
USB-C, shipped with both USB-A and C cable: HDMI capture card
Many of my devices that use USB for charging are still micro-USB
So yeah, many of these devices are quite old, but from a practical standpoint, I actually need zero USB-C sockets on my motherboard, and many USB-A. I guess it will change in the future, and it is good I have a USB-C (unused) port on my motherboard, but for now USB-A is simply more useful.
There's still the oddball micro-B (or mini-B, which is an awful connector) device out there, but that does not require a type A port.
Now multiply this circuitry by 6-10 ports...
If they support just one display but you can plug it in any port is one thing.
On a motherboard you're more likely to see 'these 5 ports are data only, 2 of them can charge beyond 5W, and that 6th port can be used for a display'.
I'm almost sure I can repair USB-A 3.0 connectors.
I'm 90% sure I won't be able to fix even 2.0 USB-C without help of special tools and a microscope, not to mention hand tremor. (
My MacBook pro only has USB-C ports, they work well for data, video out, as well as power (charging) and I am glad to be rid of the USB-A ports.
Almost everything (Including my 200Wh solar generator!) Will charge from 5v at 5W on a regular USB, and almost nothing really needs more than that, slow charging is quite often fine for phones and tablets.
Phones tell you if they slow charge, so it's just a matter of keeping the good cable plugged in the good adapter.
For the way most people use USB-C, as a power cable that can do data with a little extra work when needed, it's already great.
The standards specify a rather limited set of cables, and it specifies clear ways to label them which make it extremely obvious to consumers what the cable is capable of. But manufacturers just... can't be bothered to actually follow the standard.
The main reason why there isn't one cable is that it has mutually-incompatible goals. A high-speed data cable needs expensive, thick, shielded data wires - and is limited to about 80 cm in length due to signal integrity issues. All completely fine for connecting a laptop to a docking station.
On the other hand, a smartphone charging cable needs to be cheap, long, and flexible - but it doesn't need to carry high-speed data. The aforementioned docking station cable would technically work, but it'd be $30 rather than $3 and provide a far worse user experience.
I think this is the big one. Having only fast cables is already possible. Just toss out all your unknown and slower USB-C cables, and buy a bunch of known good 30$ Thunderbolt 4 cables to replace them all. You don't need to force manufacturers to do anything.
But I'm sure the majority of users don't care about USB 4 or Thunderbolt on all their cables. They've probably never used USB-C for mass data transfers, it's a charging cable, or maybe a USB 2.0 data rate devices like a Playstation controller or a headphones adapter now that 3.5mm jack is dead. Even most of the enthusiasts here probably don't care about spending an extra 5$ to upgrade their keyboard's USB-C cable to USB 3. It's just a waste of money.
That's a crap connector implementation problem. If the connector is compliant with the spec, it will only go in one way. (Looking at you, Yubikey.)
I've seen this mentioned before, and I don't get it. Never ever have I inserted an USB-type A plug upside down. There have been instances where I had to fumble around to find the right port, but that never resulted in inserting the plug in the wrong way. How much force do you need to apply to even achieve that?
I don’t want to have to use dongles unnecessarily.
> Apple fanboys/fangirls/fanothers: even the Mac Pro includes two legacy USB-A ports (admittedly it also has four Thunderbolt ports). Why is this relic of old tech cluttering the clean design of an Apple product in 2021?
This is naive. The chip hardware support to have 2 extra USB A ports is nothing compared to having two extra USB C/Thunderbolt ports and USB C/Thunderbolt is overkill for many situations.
They are in the range of $10 Put in an expense report if IT doesn’t have one for you?
The windows machines at work have A ports (and C). They have a single notable leg up in the MBPs, now, as far as pick-up-and-go capability. Of course they still lag in other areas, but it’s gone from pure win to “most of it’s better… except that one thing”.
On one hand that's what we asked for. On the other hand it was in the same wave as giving up on the touch bar, slowing (stopping ?) the evolution of the iPad, no touch support on the laptops when the design changes were hinting at it.
Basically it felt like they froze the hardware form factors in time to solly focus on the ARM transition and the Vision Pro. That's a good decision on many front, and also a sign that the mac is now in its "conservative" phase where change isn't to be expected for a very long time if ever.
Now that Panos is also gone from Microsoft, I wonder where innovation will happen on the laptop/desktop side. Asus and Lenovo ? If it doesn't, desktops will slowly fit into the mainframes' position, and laptops will be legacy/ultra niche tools.
Perhaps then it will truely be the year of the desktop for linux ?
Apple typically tries for a fixed design cycle - the 2016 MacBook Pro design changed in 2021, so you can hypothesize when the next significant revision.
Loud voices stated that pros hated the keyboard, hated the Touch Bar, hated having to use dongles to do certain tasks like give a presentation or pull in photos from their camera. People also waxed poetic about MagSafe.
Lo and behold, the next version changed the keyboard, dropped the Touch Bar, and added HDMI and SD card slots, and added back MagSafe as a charging option.
The iPad has had hardware revisions since then (it has gone from A15X to M2) but there has been some hold-up on rolling out new models. The oddity is that nobody reporting based on supply chain leaks has knowledge here.
My suspicion is that there was originally a launch planned for March 2023 of new Air, Pro, Mini, and two new Apple Pencil models. For some reason - all we got was a new base Pencil model this year, and that was only released last month.
I know of no design changes to laptop hardware that hinted there would be touch support. The software design changes in MacOS 11 and beyond have been around UX alignment with iOS, and more specifically iPadOS. Apple wants the 'mobile' team that works on iOS apps to see that there is a supported and intuitive way to adopt their codebase to iPad and Mac releases, rather than having the 'web' team wrap the code in Electron for Mac and letting iPad run in iPhone compatibility mode.
This is why iPadOS has been gaining Mac-like features (mouse/trackpad support, keyboard shortcuts, multitasking/multi-monitor enhancements to name a few larger ones)
> Basically it felt like they froze the hardware form factors in time to solly focus on the ARM transition and the Vision Pro.
The Pro models have a design expected to accommodate the M1 through M5. Several iPad models are all due for a design change, but for whatever reason thats gummed up.
I would expect if design resources are taken up by Vision Pro, they don't break or pause their iterative process - they just have less manpower to propose and implement changes in an iteration.
Yes, if we compared the current laptop lineup to 2015's, the only real significant changes are USB C and the 14" notched screens. Internals radically changed as well as performance, battery life, and that's where Apple is keeping the focus (rightly so given the reaction to the current models, where the consensus seems to be to not touch anything anymore outside of the battery and the chips).
> The iPad has had hardware revisions since then (it has gone from A15X to M2)
Yes, same path as the mac where internal changes seem to be the priority. The biggest change for me was the introduction of the cantilever keyboard as an option, which as you point out went along with Mac-like features coming in the OS.
In contrast, in the same time span Microsoft introduced the Surface Studio line (the elusive 2+ desktop and the widely loved but crazy expensive laptop) and the Surface Pro line that directly answered the "What's a computer ?" question Apple was asking. Looking at the numbers [0] it seems they found a decent niche where the iPad has stagnated for so long.
I think Apple could have interesting ideas for the next iPads, but as you say, no leaks whatsoever at this point probably means it's at least a year down the line, and if it's a real big change the iteration process will need that much time (and they should take their time. A half baked prototype would be killed on the spot after such a long wait)
[0] https://www.windowscentral.com/hardware/laptops/microsoft-su...
Type C doesn't require anything more than USB 2.0 with the same signals routed out. There's no difference whatsoever. Type C is just a connector. Yes there will be more chip support if you decide to make the connector more fully-functional but that design choice is on the device manufacturer. They do not need to do that to have a Type C port.
In the end the only thing that is understandable to most users is when all the ports on a system provide the same capabilities (and probably Thunderbolt 4).
They actually do :) they don't all have the same capabilities. Some are Thunderbolt, some aren't.
USB4 goes some way to addressing this concern though, since anything marked USB4 has to be fully-functional.
Usb-c cables are the most versatile. You can get all kinds of pigtails and adapters to turn them into anything else. Other connectors don't have that property of universality, because they don't have enough cables.
Plus, "active cable" is close enough to an oxymoron to make me afraid we overreached.
(I do like that a small pocket kit with an USB C cable and a couple of adapters seems to cover most needs.)
Hobby level stuff would be a lot simpler if any old microcontroller could talk to a PPS supply, interrogate cables, etc.
Although probably easy to implement in silicon, USB PD is an absolute nightmare to DIY. Pretty much your only option is to get a dedicated PHY like the FUSB302B to do the actual electronic part of PD comms for you.
One-wire stuff is so cheap, and and they have EEPROMS meant for exactly this kind of electronic marking(I believe it's what power adapters did before USB), and it can be done with pure software on an MCU costing pennies.
The main use I encounter where USB-A is actually better are dongles that don't stick out.
- The USB 3.2 standard replaced 3.1/3.0, but explicitly did not replace USB 2.0
- Similarly, USB 4 guarantees USB 3.2 and USB 2.0 compatibility.
It doesn't matter that USB 4 does not define a Type A connector for USB 4 connections: a USB 4 controller can accept Type A on circuitry that's designed to operate in USB 2.0 compatibility mode.
The incentives are to make the motherboard at a price point and A connectors are going to be 1cent or less cheaper. This is probably true for the cable adaptors too.
But if I had to put money on one thing it's power - you can run a small laptop off USB-C which is where the whole thing shoukd be moving to - USB-C for everything power and data, but making every connector hook up to the 5.5V on the motherboard is awkward and marking just one is confusing.
It's not a great argument but my take is USB-C is only great when every connection is USB-C and if it's not great then why bother
Though I say this, I hope that we all move forward to USB-C soon.
First of all, most of us who use PCs will use them for a very long time. A PC put together will often last someone a full decade. The specification was barely published and finalized less than 10 years ago (August 2014)!
USB 3.1 (still using the USB-A port) was introduced around the same time! USB-C had not hit widespread adoption until roughly 6 years ago - and the vast majority of computers that are in use today are from 5 years ago.
Secondly, USB-C cables are still relatively expensive. Many cables don't adhere to the standard; many can only deliver data and not power, while other still can do power delivery but not data.
Thirdly, USB-C ports may be the shiny new kind of port, but I find them to be incredibly brittle on motherboards and laptops. USB-A ports tend to be built like a tank, while USB-C ones tend to break if you push it in too far. Even though they're supposed to be more resilient, but somehow they aren't.
Finally, there's still a bunch of stuff that uses USB-A.. no one wants to use a bunch of dongles with their PC.
This is also related to the fact that a lot of high-end keyboards/mouses are also PS/2.
They don't cost more than USB, are simpler in many ways, and if the mobo has dedicated ports for them, I think it make sense to plug the keyboard and mouse there to free up USB ports for other peripherals that are almost exclusively USB.
The link below has several outlined though I can’t speak to their veracity or relevance anymore
https://superuser.com/questions/341215/is-there-a-distinct-a...
You can easily see the difference - with 125Hz it's impossible to draw a good circle with a mouse since it will always draw short straight lines
What it probably does not have is a detectable error counter that marks a link as broken (e.g. in case of a bad/damaged cable, plug or controller) before the chance of an undetected error becomes unacceptably large, although it seems like a host would be able to implement that as an optional feature?
That's in fact how it works for USB bulk transfers: The host learns about the checksum error having occurred and it will retry until it passes.
That doesn't seem inefficient to me, given the low error rates involved (many flavors of Ethernet do the same, for example) – are you saying there should be FEC?
> But this approach doesn't apply to e.g. high speed industrial cameras.
These usually use isochronous transfers, where errors are indeed only detected (and reported), but no retransmission is attempted.
These devices are probably missing the resistors between each of the two CC pins and the ground, which are necessary to tell the computer on the other end of the C-to-C cable "I'm a device and need you to put 5V on the power pins". The C-to-A cable, on the other hand, always has that 5V power (because the A end of the connection always supplies power; that's the reason why A-to-A cables are forbidden, they would short together the power supply of both ends), which means the device gets powered even if it's missing the CC resistors.
That is, it's a manufacturing defect, and the device was probably tested only with C-to-A cables; once C-to-C cables become more common (at least where I live, it took a long time before I managed to even find one, while C-to-A cables were plentiful and many devices came with one), this will become less of a problem.
It's annoying enough swapping wireless mouse adapter and keyboard plugs between my personal computer and my work computers multiple times per hour without also plugging and unplugging adapters.
Bluetooth would be even worse. But that raises the question that maybe we aren't getting a lot of USB-C ports because wireless is expected to leapfrog it to some extent?
The biggest improvement in the building experience of the past 20+ years is probably getting rid of SATA and IDE cables with NVME SSDs.
It’s the other way around.
USB-C sockets are much more robust than their A counterparts, since the spring is in the plug for C, as opposed to in the socket for A.
but i doubt you will get more cycles out of C in real life. that might be what the spec says but given the pitch of the pins on the C connector compared to the A, you have a world of greater tolerance to work with
> but i doubt you will get more cycles out of C in real life
You're free to doubt the designers of the USB specification and/or the manufacturer's compliance with the specification, but just logically, the part about having the springs in the plug, not the port, makes sense to me.
I've seen many broken USB-A ports in airplanes and other public charging ports with the spring connectors bent beyond recognition.
I mean... usb 4 literally doesn't define a type-a connector (or type-b). Usb3.2 is the "best" a usb-a port is ever going to deliver.
So while it may still be popular and in-use, from the view of usb as a standard, it is deprecated: it's not present in the latest version.
Actually, it is:
> The three sizes of USB connectors are the default, or standard, format intended for desktop or portable equipment, the mini intended for mobile equipment, which was deprecated when it was replaced by the thinner micro size, all of which were deprecated in USB 3.2 in favor of Type-C.
Flight sticks, wheels, button boxes basically everything that is wired use USB-A
That said, a lot of new gear is USB-C only
It just feels more fragile.
High resolution displays at high frame rates
High speed storage
External GPUs
High speed networking
It could be anything from USB 2.0 up to USB 4/Thunderbolt 4.