That seems worse than just buying dongles, because nothing else I'll want to plug anything into is USB-c. The cables would still be bound to the MacBook for all use cases.

Give it a year or two, and practically every computing device that had some form of USB before, will have at least some, if not majority or all USB-C.

I think it's hugely ironic the 'U' in 'USB' stands for 'Universal'.

Guess they didn't mean it after all.

Before USB Type C there were already at least four very common USB connectors I can think of off the top of my head. "Universal" was never intended to indicate that only one connector exists.

It's still universal, that's why you can get a USB A to USB C cable that doesn't need any kind of chip in it.

You're crazy if you think that 4-conductor rectangular non-reversible connector was going to be the end-all be-all for USB forever. We had to upgrade eventually. Be thankful that this change is being relatively swift and reasonably future-proof. USB C should be good for quite a few more years.

If it's an upgrade, why are people still calling it "USB"? This isn't semver; people don't ask what version of the cable you have. I still don't understand the difference between USB-1 and USB-2 except I shouldn't charge over USB-1. I don't own any USB-3 peripherals, let alone USB-C.

This is going to haunt technical support for literally decades.

> why are people still calling it "USB"?

Because you can still run the USB 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, and 3.0 protocols over it

This may be true (and it's an important saving grace), but it's the ports and cables people interact with, NOT the protocol.

I wish they had simply called it "ngSB" or something like that. People understand the need for converters; it's the branding that's terrible.

Counterpoint: People call the USB ports on phones (micro/mini) USB, despite not being compatible with the full sized port.

I just told you why: it's still universal.

USBC is no less Universal than micro USB.

It's actually "universal" now, for the first time in history. You can run anything through it, including power and your 4/5K displays. It's far less "serial" than it used to be, though.

except there's already a bunch of different usb-c cables looking identical but being incompatible in subtle ways, including official Apple ones?

There's industry-wide confusion related to the USB-C plug

USB-C != USB 3.1

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/197145-reversible-usb-...

USB-C != Thunderbolt 3

http://blog.fosketts.net/2016/10/29/total-nightmare-usb-c-th...

The extremetech article really frustrates me. So, can I plug in a USB 3.0 device with USB-C connector to a USB-C Macbook Pro (that has USB 3.1)? What about the Macbook One?

sigh

I've read about situations like this, and it's frustrating to think that something like this can occur.

I think it's reasonable to wonder how often this is actually in issue in practice. I don't have a new MBP (or any peripherals for that matter), so I can't speak to this directly.

Do you have a new MBP or know anyone personally who does? Have you or they had any issues with cable incompatibility?

This is just as true of any other cable. The Lightning cables you can buy at the corner store look like regular ones, but they don't have data lines, and they won't charge at full voltage. Cables are just awful. Or, one might say, knock-off cables are awful, and you shouldn't let them polute your junk drawer lest you never sort them back out.

you're missing the

> including official Apple ones

part here. If Apple had planned it better, all their USB-C cables (starting with the Macbook One) could do all the functions they need for any Apple product going forward. But even today, if you walk to an Apple store and buy a bunch of USB-C Apple products, you'll probably have to color code them yourself to not mix them up, because it won't work if you do. All Apple is helping here is saying "if you have a cable with an intsy tiny serial number print starting with X, use it only for Y". Gee thanks, that sure is a great ecosystem you got going here Apple.

There's a reason why Apple 1997 - 2007 pushed interoperable standards hard (examples: USB-A, 802.11B and then G, Firewire, mini-DP). None of these had connectors that you could confuse, including when switching between different Firewire standards, and these buses did fairly complex things as well. They even had a powerbook generation with two different Firewire ports so people don't get left hanging with their old Firewire devices. That's all under Steve Jobs and Jony Ive, just Ive not being the one in charge of doing these decisions.

I'm not sure, but I would argue having a charging cable with no data pins is the best thing you can do for security (for an unassuming user) so people can just charge of random USB ports without worrying about potential exploits.

As I understand it, there's a pretty significant tradeoff involved. If you want a USB-C cable that does everything, you're going to pay a lot more and get something that's much thicker than you need to, say, charge an iPhone.

So yes, ideally all Apple cables would do everything imaginable, but I understand why they didn't choose to do that.

But that's the thing, they don't even use it to charge iPhones, and your argument would be one for them to keep lightning, which seems like a fine connector to me. But Apple has been pushing USB-C on personal computers, and there IMO they should just have waited and then jumped on the first solution that does everything.

> It's actually "universal" now, for the first time in history. You can run anything through it, including power and your 4/5K displays.

Well, anything but USB 1-3! :face-with-tears-of-pain:

Also, all the ports may look the same, even fit the same port, but they're not the same, which is a terrible user experience.

All in all, I can say I understand nothing about usb-c with confidence except I don't have any usb cables to stick in the ports and nowhere to stick the usb cables I do have.

> Also, all the ports may look the same, even fit the same port, but they're not the same, which is a terrible user experience.

Thats true of some laptops, but the new macbook pros allow any connection (power/display/whataver) to any of the usb-c ports. When I'm lying in bed I can now roll over and just swap which side of the laptop the power cable connects to.

(Well apparently the ports on one side of the machine are a bit faster, but I don't know of any USB devices which can take advantage of even the slower speed USB 3.1 provides. I certainly don't own any.)

The side with the USB logo is always up. At least on all devices I ever used.

> up

You realize that USB ports aren't always "up & down". Sometimes they're sideways. Sometimes they're reversed.

As someone with a USB C phone who is trying to convert all my devices to it: reversibility is far from a necessity, I did just fine for years with USB B on my phones, but it is extremely nice to not have to even think about direction. And now, it is noticeably annoying when I have to use MicroUSB.

Cables? Yes, except where the logo is on both sides. Sockets? Seems to depend entirely on what's convenient for the hardware/PCB layout. From the last 48h: one of my chargers, my car, and two different model monitors all have "upside down" USB sockets...

I have at least one micro USB cable where the logo is on the bottom.

I have cables with two logos, neither of which is the USB one.