Re:USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed ...
by sokoloff on Monday October 09, 2023 @11:34PM
(#37828246)
There isn't a particularly Pareto-better solution (other than better labeling, as you suggest).
One of the things I find particularly aggravating though is the discussion that goes approximately "it's outrageous that I should have to buy a new cable for my device <glares menacingly at Apple pre-USB-C>" followed almost immediately by "yeah, it turns out I have to buy a new cable for my device <because reasons>..."
Because USB-C does a lot and touches a lot of things, I think there's a tendency to place the blame on it (and specifically its cables) for any circumstance where 'plug does not work as expected', which I agree is a frustrating problem that isn't fully worked out.
I bet your HP docks are like Dell power adapters, which only provide specific volts/amps and maybe use some proprietary negotiation and aren't great device-agnostic chargers. I've experienced this firsthand, and unfortunately the blame lines squarely with HP/Dell/your IT department. It's also a sort of 'stage 1' problem in USB-C's rollout, in that manufacturers are used to doing things their way (e.g. proprietary power bricks), and the feedback loop of customer expectations hasn't yet reached a point to pressure them to change. When customers say 'this sucks it doesn't charge my iPad', HP/Dell/whoever begrudgingly realize they need to up their charger game, and little by little the problem is solved.
I think politics might be the best lens to see USB-C through, because USB-C will only work as expected when consumers are providing that pressure. Hence my point about consumer education and clearer labeling being the unforced error of USB-C: moving up the learning curve quicker will minimize these problems and shake manufacturers into offering the thing that meet user expectations and the promise of USB-C. Ultimately someone has to make these things though and manufacturers all have their own misaligned incentives. It's the job of standards to meet them where they are and provide a path to aligning their incentives with better user experience. The reality is it's herding cats.
I haven't seen anything in this thread or other USB-C threads that has offered a solution that improves upon the spec itself that is realistically possible within the constraints USB-C is operating in. That's unfortunate but I think represents the idea that USB-C is, to paraphrase, 'the worst type of connector, except for all the others'.