I've played around putting USB connectors directly on PCBs, and USB-A is way more lenient than USB-C. With USB-A, you can use basically any PCB thickness between the standard 1.6mm and 2.2mm, and it'll work well enough.

USB-C's midplate is specified at 0.7mm, and all of the cheap chinese PCB manufacturers only offer 0.6mm and 0.8mm. 0.6mm is too thin to make reliable contact with most of the cables I've tried: I haven't gotten around to ordering another batch at 0.8mm, but plugging the corner of a 0.8mm M.2 SSD into a USB-C cable, it's pretty (i.e. probably slightly too) snug. Thin PCBs are also extremely flexible, which isn't great for brittle solder joints, ceramic capacitors, etc.

While this is generally true, I think it’s less true for embedded systems. All of the tools I use at work for embedded systems engineering (JLink, serial adapter, oscilloscope, logic analyzer, nearly all MCU dev boards and FPGAs) are USB-A. I use a MBP and simply could do any work whatsoever without a USB hub. I think it’s fair to assume anyone in the industry can use USB-A.

In the industry, yes, I agree. Except for maybe managers but even they probably have a dock on their desk that includes USB-A.

Edit: I remember something, having done work related to embedded stuff. About 6 years ago, we still had 3.5" floppy drives in a couple of scopes in the lab. We replaced those with a device that internally had the interface of a 3.5" floppy drive, but on the outer faceplate it had a USB-A connector for thumb drives.

I would assume someone doing embedded work would not only have to have USB, but serial. Is that incorrect? It seemed like that was even included in your list?

I usually have two or three USB to serial converters plugged into my computer at work at any time. I expect most embedded people would do similar (or use serial console servers over a network).

A female to C male adapters exist, but C female to A male adapters are forbidden by the spec.

That means you need to create A peripherals if you want the largest audience.

Are you sure this is the case? I bought a couple of these to have newer peripherals work on my older laptop.

Yeah, they sell them but they're not supposed to. It's because putting an A on each end of a C cable and connecting two A hosts together can destroy the two A hosts.

Practically, since you can find them as you say, is that as a peripheral vendor in the west, you can't ship a C device with a C to A plug because you'll lose your license.

What an absurd tragedy. Everyone was just fine with usb-A and ethernet ports and hdmi but no, now these laptops need dongles for literally everything.

USB-A is not 'just fine'. It's uni-directional. Which is an insane design for something being constantly plugged in and out. It's also low-bandwidth and low-power. Most devices these days have bluetooth, so it isn't really needed except for power and monitors. USB-C is a step-up in everything and I'm happy with only USB-C.

Not everything needs to be constantly plugged. My desktop doesn't even have Bluetooth in it. I'm quite happy with the USB A ports on my PC when it comes to plugging in mice, keyboards, USB storage, etc. If you use USB devices on a regular basis, you'll remember which way USB ports are oriented, and you can just look at the end of the USB cable to see which way it needs to go in.

Having said that, I will say the USB C connector on my phone is far superior, as I plug/unplug it daily.

Power and bandwidth aren't even related to connector type.

> If you use USB devices on a regular basis, you'll remember which way USB ports are oriented, and you can just look at the end of the USB cable to see which way it needs to go in.

You shouldn't need to remember orientation or look at it! You're apologising for a bad design.

> Power and bandwidth aren't even related to connector type.

Not true! For example the max bandwidth you can currently put through USB-A is 10 Gbps with USB 3.1. Through USB-C it's up to 50 Gbps with Thunderbolt 3.

The asymmetry of the USB-A connector is at worst a minor inconvenience. Definitely not in itself a good reason to break compatibility. And most USB devices are not frequently plugged in and out (indeed, for those that are, Bluetooth is a better choice!)

Growing pains, we'll get over it. USB-C fixes the problem everyone complained about forever of turning the plug over three times before getting it to be rightside up, and gives us enough contact points for modern video streams. I feel like making it compatible with the older USB standards by just connecting a subset of pins is super useful, and it's about as much backwards compatibility as we can expect with major sacrifices in other regards. I've got a phone with two USB-C ports, a hub that gives me two USB-A ports, an ethernet, and another USB-C, and a separate USB-C to HDMI adapter. I wouldn't trade either of my USB-C ports for a dedicated USB-A.

Absurd tragedy? Maybe for you. For me, it's been a good life since the 2016 MacBook Pro. I got a decent dock, and connect everything with a single cable.

I would assume you paid a good $150 for one, given that the others either don’t supply enough power or can’t do 4K@60.

More. I paid 250 euros for a CalDigit TS3 Plus. Thing is amazing.

When I first got my MacBook Pro, I just got USB-C cables for my external monitor and my (USB-A) hub. That was very cheap, but I love the convenience of Thunderbolt and shelled out the cash.

I am struggling to find good info - does usb-c support more than one display on one cable at 4k@60?

Yup, all Thunderbolt 3 docks support two 4K displays @ 60 Hz.