|
|
|
|
|
|
by ericswpark
1053 days ago
|
|
|
Author here; I don't think my blog post is in support of the USB-IF (unless I missed a sentence I wrote somewhere that insinuates otherwise...) I just think selling defective products that don't charge with certain cables shouldn't be allowed. |
|
|
In support of your point, this sentence, "I mean, the USB-C spec is really long, and probably very complicated thanks to the USB-IF committee" makes me think we probably agree more than disagree about the USB-IF.
I was probably reacting more to my own bitter experience with USB-C/3.xyz-it-even-has-electrolytes version(s).
It was relatively trivial to stand up a USB 2.x system.
USB 3.x with Type C connectors? Orders of magnitude more challenging throughout the stack. Even 99% of the Type-C connector hardware is bullshit.
I guess I'm empathizing with the opposite view that your title presents.
I truly don't care about _USB-C conformity_.
That said, I'd be embarrassed if my product that had a USB-C connector did not (at least slow) charge with a standard Type-C cable.