Exactly! We can call the one for small peripherals "USB", the one for monitors "VGA", the one for networking "ethernet", the one for power "AC"... I suspect most users can figure out how to manage that.
Snark aside, I actually agree with you. The market powers that be completely messed this up. Basically, phones have limited port space. And for their benefit, and only their benefit, we've tried to cram together the entirety of device I/O into one multi-pronged standard that was clearly never going to work.
And those phones? Their fancy USB-C ports are almost exclusively idle. A median high end phone never does anything with that port it couldn't have gotten with a single barrel connector with ~10V DC.
I'll take 10 minutes extra effort every few years to order the correct cable in exchange for that...
Wrong kind of names. For these cables, all you should need to know is a speed rating. And they almost work that way, but the ball got dropped in a few places and the cables are badly labeled, so it turns into a nightmare.
> And for their benefit, and only their benefit, we've tried to cram together the entirety of device I/O into one multi-pronged standard that was clearly never going to work.
I can't agree at all with that. The needs of phones were already satisfied by USB micro, long before any of this cramming started. USB-C's complication is not because of phones.
And even though the data connection is rarely used, it sucks to not have it available for file transfers and backups and tethering. And barrel plugs are terrible for charging on the go. You have far fewer outlets than USB, and there are too many different sizes.
Before the legislation, most phone chargers had the wire fixed to the transformer, and were unique to each manufacturer. The law reduced the e-waste from obsolete chargers, but didn't care so much for the wire.
Der Micro-USB-Standard bezeichnet eine Regelung auf Basis des USB-Standards, nach der ab 2011 die Steckverbinder für die Stromversorgung von Mobiltelefonen und anderen elektronischen Geräten in Europa vereinheitlicht wurden (Norm EN 62684:2011). [...] Das Kabel kann entweder fest oder durch einen Stecker mit dem Ladegerät verbunden sein. Bei einem steckbaren Kabel ist ein Standard-USB-Stecker (Typ A) zur Verbindung mit dem Ladegerät zu nutzen.
The Micro-USB standard is a regulation on the basis of the USB standard, according to which the plug for charging mobile phones and other electronic devices has been unified since 2011 (European Norm EN 62684:2011). [...] The cable can either be fixed to the charger or connected with a plug. In the latter case a USB-A plug is to be used.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_external_power_supply#R...
The whole catchy idea behind USB-C (unfortunately perpetuated here by people who should know better) is that there is ONE SOCKET, ONE PLUG and ONE CABLE. Oh, the dream of using a single connector.
Unfortunately, this is far from reality and the result is a complete mess, which is why I'm not a big fan of the whole USB-C thing. Especially given that I'm a hostage, because a certain computer company whose computers generally suck the least, decided to show courage by moving to USB-C even though the ecosystem is nowhere near mature — let's put pressure on the manufacturers by getting hostages (oops, "users") on board.
I wish USB-C mandated some sort of connector marking: color strips, or whatever, that would let me figure out what would work.
There's nothing benefiting customers from this cable mess. It only enables dishonest businesses, as customers can't tell cables apart until they plug them in and try to use them.
I mean cable with all the features is damn expensive if you compare it to the usual(shitty quality) USB2.0 cables. Most folks would buy cheaper one because difference in prices between USB2.0 and USB-C with all features would be too high. It would feel like a rip-off to them.
The whole idea of "one connector that does everything" is flawed, unless you standardize what "everything" means and give users visual clues. Such as, oh, a different type of connector, like we used to have.
I get precisely ZERO benefit from using a USB-C connector for my monitor, I only get a large amount of pain.
The line I'm trying to stride here is, on the one hand, avoiding what USB-C ended up being, but on the other hand not returning back to the days of feature phones, where you had as many physically and electrically distinct charger and data ports as there were phone models. There must be a sane state somewhere in the middle.
I still remember when the iMac came out with two USB ports, a CD drive, and nothing else. It was a couple of years too early, or did it prove that you could make a successful computer without vital things like a parallel port and a floppy drive?
Since when was USB-C such a major issue on Thinkpads?
The whole thing makes a mockery of the core reason for USB to exist, which was so we wouldn't need a unique cable for each device. And so here we are...
I have been told those names were not intended for the consumer. (And indeed "USB 3.1 gen 2" vs "USB3.1 gen 1", seriously?).
I think there is another set of names, also inconsistent and unparallel with each other or the first set of names, intended for the consumer, that nobody can seem to figure out.
More precisely: "Why don't they give them _reasonable_ usable names, and only one set so everyone uses the same one?"
This still seems to be an obvious part of the design of the product to me.
And the latter two would be "USB 3.3", "USB 3.4", problem solved :)
Initially, there was USB 3.0 at 5Gbps, USB 2.0 at 480Mbps, and USB 1.1 at 12 Mbps.
Then, when they added a 10Gbps mode, they called it USB 3.1 Gen 2, and renamed USB 3.0 to USB 3.1 Gen 1.
They already have plans for USB 3.2: 5Gbps will be USB 3.2 Gen 1, 10Gbps will be USB 3.2 Gen 2, and 20 Gbps will be USB 3.2 Gen 2x2. Yup, Gen 2x2 is next.
And there is no more USB 3.0 - presumably no vendor wants to have to sell an older number, so they rename them all so consumers are confused and think they are all the latest 3.x
ref: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/02/usb-3-2-is-going-to-...
As soon as its phones go USB-C, they're going to have to deal with half a million people on the internet complaining that their junk shop cable doesn't work right or do what they thought it would.
This already happens though. I have a dollar store "Lightning" cable that only has a third of the pins and only works one way.
Learning just that one fact made it worth the click. I now know to just always look for SuperSpeed (or the SS marking) on any cable I buy.
If we could just all start calling them SuperSpeed cables, SuperSpeed10 for 10Gbps, and I assume we will eventually have SuperSpeed20, etc... that would be just fine by me! Honestly, better marketing IMO as well.
The time for the "USB" acronym has passed. Especially since the debacle of "USB3" and Gen1 Gen2 nonsense. "SuperSpeed", optionally followed by a number which indicates a data rate would be just lovely.
They seem to have either no names or too many names where it's unclear what is intended for the consumer.
Just giving the cable a clear name (in words, not icons), so you could know what you were buying, and a device could say "you need this kind of cable", and a person could write a blog saying "to support DP-Alt-Mode you need X kind of cable" and all use the terminology... would seem to go a long way.
It seems odd that the USB people have not figured this out.
We can't even figure out what the CALL em all consistently.