Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Dylan16807 3176 days ago
Most of the rant is about different device capabilities, and how cables being more or less the same makes it almost worse instead of better.

And that high variance in cable quality is a bigger deal than it needs to be. You can't tell by looking at a cable what bandwidth and amperage it's supposed to support. Even if it has thick wires you can't tell if it has a chip to enable 5A charging.

Also there's a non-quality factor. USB-C cables with no high speed wire pairs are valid and are quite common. You don't need more than USB 2.0 in a charging cable.
1 comments
aidenn0 3176 days ago
It would be nice if we had some standardized iconography for the cables (xAmps, thunderbolt/non-thunderbolt, &c.). There are really only a few useful permutations of cables.

Devices are a bit more complicated, but I'm hoping that the Hub situation will sort itself out (early in the days of USB 1.1, I remember plenty of devices that wouldn't work with hubs, or only with certain hubs).

link
matt_kantor 3176 days ago
There is standardized iconography[0][1]. It's enforced under trademark law by the USB Implementers Forum. In addition to the old "basic" (USB 1.0/1.1), "hi-speed" (USB 2.0), and "on the go" icons there's now "superspeed" (USB 3.0), "superspeed+" (USB 3.1), and icons for the power delivery spec. The new icons are just as inscrutable as the old ones, but they exist and the USB Implementers Forum requires correct labeling for all cables and devices.

The various proprietary extensions might be less consistent with labeling, but at least every Thunderbolt-compatible cable I've seen has a little lightning bolt icon in addition to the standard USB ones.

[0]: http://www.usb.org/developers/logo_license/Trademark_License...

[1]: http://www.usb.org/developers/logo_license/USB-IF_Logo_Usage...

link
Dylan16807 3176 days ago
The icons exist, but the fraction of type C plugs that have icons on them seems to be extremely low.
link