[YuechenLi]

Not quite right, USB-C ports are generally cheaper nowadays because they are smaller, consumes less material for plastic/metal, more easily automatable production wise in terms of tooling, and scale for them is a lot higher because of mobile usage. You don't really need extra production chips since the console USB-C ports are designed for PD and crippled 14/16 pin versions that only supports the USB 2.0 speed, because the high-speed pins literally do not exist on those.

[inigyou]

You forgot all the extra signaling that type C ports have? Nobody wants a type C port that only does USB 2.0.

[YuechenLi]

They are extremely common actually. Why do you think the standard iPhones only does USB 2.0 transfer speed? The high-speed signal pins are simply not there, but the connectors themselves are still standard compliant.

Lower transfer rate means less shielding is needed for the cable as well as the overmold, and enables longer and more flexible cables, as extra shielding stiffens the cables.

[LoganDark]

> Why do you think the standard iPhones only does USB 2.0 transfer speed?

Because they saved die space in silicon? Same reason the MacBook Neo only has a single USB 3 and a USB 2. It seems that their A-series Pro silicon only has hardware for a single USB 3, and their non-Pro silicon doesn't even have it at all. I highly doubt they are sparing pins from the connector, the complexity of making a special port variant for that far surely outweighs any potential savings.