|
|
|
|
|
by picture
944 days ago
|
|
Comparing technology to human lifetimes doesn't seem very relevant. Even not accounting for broad categories like "fire" or "language", we're still using individual technology from "long ago" like knives, forks, pen and paper, etc. It's fine to make improvements that keep backwards compatibility (more ergonomic scissor should be able to cut the same paper), but changing connector just because it's old is unwise. 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...