People hate it? Why? It's actually good.

>>107258783
kills your battery faster due to fast charging unlike ones before, if you put it the right side up that's hidden by the manufacturers it doesn't do this but it's very hard to find it

>>107258814
I've seen a lot of animosity towards it on here. Especially when the EU forced Apple to use it.

>>107258836
>it's the iShit retards
Gotcha.

>>107258783
melt your hardware for free

>>107258783
>cant' tell on sight if one cable will charge fast, or transfer data faster than USB2, or supports thunderbolt

>>107258783
I would've liked it if all cables are the same. It's really hard to track which supports USB 3, gen whatever, how many whats and all that. I even have some cables that only work as charging cables. It's a wild west.

>>107258783
it's a fucking cable, having a problem with it is equally retarded to shitting our pants over how great it is.

>Why should I hate this again?
They are scams, I bought USB-C flash drives and don't get close to 10Gbps when transferring files on mint. It barely does 20MB/s

>>107258783
there is a length limit for high speed cables - they can not be longer than a meter or so.

other than that no reason to hate it.

>>107258848
>andreet shiteater loves slop being rammed down his throat
meanwhile the discerning applechad knows that lightning was the perfect connector

>blocks you're a path

>>107259028
Maybe they should've made it an open standard then. Proprietary niggers getting fucked again, too bad so sad.

>>107258987
Brainlet take. The connector itself isn't the bottleneck for flash storage.

>>107259158
>Maybe they should've made it an open standard then
They did though. It's called USB type-c.

>>107259158
i dont want poorfags using apple

>>107258783
You shouldn't, the only ones who "hate it" are zoomer freetards who are brainwashed and don't remember how bad it used to be before it.

after finally getting a 17 pro, airpods 2 pro and ipad 10th gen all with USB-C, i've had fun buying chargers, cables, cable testers, powerbanks etc and working out the best ones with the best outputs

i just got a 156w car charger and a usb-c 'smart' cable with 15 different barrel jack adapters that always requests 20v, so now I can charge laptops in the car (i work in the bush and people often bring their work laptops), it saves needing a DC-AC setup

>>107258814
One of the common issues is that it falls out easily with a bit of unintended pressure. It's also self sacrificing by being easy to break. The purpose for both of these is so if a connected cord is yanked, it doesn't destroy the port. It's much easier to replace a cable than to replace a port. But when cable destruction happens, or it saves the port by falling out, the person doesn't realize the port was saved. They're just annoyed with what happened to the cable.

>>107259319
It still sucks if it was USB4\Thunderbolt cable. Those cost a fortune.

File: okay.jpg (49 KB, 441x515)

49 KB JPG

All my USB devices are still on USB-B.

>>107259354
I have a ton of music stuff on B. I just bought C to B adapters so on my workspace I only need type-c cables.

>>107259172
You're not rich because you bought a phone, bozo.

>>107258931
you can't tell if a cable speed with any usb connector thoughever

>>107258783
you shouldnt why would you think you should
the thing i dont like is all the different charging protocols they used to have but they seem to all be converging on the USB-PD standard

>>107258783
>Why should I hate this again?
The specs aren't anywhere on the cable itself and frequently not even on the packaging. You'll never know until plugging it in; if it has data pins, what the rated speed of those pins are, it's power delivery capabilities or what generation it is (a lot of things still ship with USB 2.0 specs). It's a complete shit-show.

Wallace and Gromit

>>107259625
it's what we deserve though

i think we need a USB type D
circular/coax connector with 24 pins

File: 1498361743697.jpg (19 KB, 480x488)

19 KB JPG

>usb c BAD because it charged too fast melting my phone!
Holy shit there are so many retards on this board.
It's literally not the fault of the connector and if you hate fast charging then SIMPLY use a charger that doesn't support it. It is THAT easy you dumb fucking fucks

>>107259625
The discerning buyer can manage all that shit. Just don't grab whatever is closest and cheapest in a store.
Normies who don't know better won't notice spec irregularities 99.99% of the time.
Everyone benefits a thousand times more from a common plug regardless.

>>107259625
In most common use cases 480 Mbps is perfectly fine.
>if it has data pins
This one is valid however, way too many cheap chinkshit devices coming with a cheap 2-wire out of spec 'USB' charging cable. That's not the standard's fault though.

>>107259695
>just use a charger that wont charge
clever move egghead

>>107258836
they forced everyone to use it.

>>107259754
>640kB ought to be anough for anybody!

File: lpt.jpg (27 KB, 474x355)

27 KB JPG

that's what you'd be using today if EU communists forced a connector in the 80s

>>107258783
you lost tranny

>>107259855
I knew someone would say this. Do you know what the most common USB devices are? Mice and keyboards. These do not come close to maxing out 2.0 speeds. Nor do speakers, game controllers, printers and so on. The fact that it is directly backwards compatible with the old standard is one of its best features.

>>107259427
im rich because im white and have a high paying job

thats why i buy apple, to style on poors like you

>>107258815
Fast charging effect on battery health is entirely negligible
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLS5Cg_yNdM

>>107258783
> Why should I hate this again?
> Different charging capacities per cable
> Different features specs per cable
> Labeling differences unclear because manufacturers are niggers and don't write them on the cable itself
> Spec was PD limited to 100w up until recently which is absurd.
If every USB c cable was the equivalent of a thunderbolt 4 cable, this wouldn't be a problem but it's not.

Believe whatever helps you sleep at night, Rajesh.

>>107260658
IDK if you really want every cable to be a TB4 one.
They are super stiff and non flexible.
Everytime I charge my phone with one I feel like I'm going to break the C port with the sheer resistance alone

>>107260709
He's just complaining for the sake of it.

I hate it because you still require a dumb charger with a USB-A to C lead if the device you're attempting to charge doesn't support USB PD which spits on the inherent assumption that if a cable plugs into a port, it will work.

>>107258783
>mechanically less durable
>USB-PD negotiations require a whole fucking chip, and bloated ass library for most microcontrollers
>retardedly complex 600KHz 1.2V protocol (???)
>manufacturers use 0.001sqmm copper wires because they need to put more of them in
>missed 5K1 resistors in USB-C port CC lines of the device you're making? Only usable with USB-A to USB-C cables fuck you
>USB-PD is only getting wider adoption (still absolutely missing from laptops)

>>107260658
Most issues also apply to any other universal standard like HDMI or Displayport.

>>107260819
what happens if you have a usbc to a adapter

>>107258783
it's super fragile so it easily breaks or even worse breaks the connector inside the device you're using
doesn't enforce proper standardization of cables so unless you label your cables yourself you'll never know if your cable can do
because it's now considered the default connector for everything most products don't ship with power adapters or cables anymore either which makes the previous issue worse

>>107259696
>The discerning buyer can manage all that shit.
No you can't because it's never really on the package and even when it is half the time it's a lie.
>just find a good brand of cables
doesn't exist because none of them have QC so you might buy a great cable that works great from brand A now and when you buy another one 6 months from now it's complete shit.

>>107260963
I don't know enough about DP to talk about but they absolutely do not apply to HDMI.

>>107260643
this is misleading, battery degradation is compounding
157 days is nothing, and the most important factor is temperature differences (while charging)

File: IMG_0749.jpg (458 KB, 1002x1002)

458 KB JPG

>>107258783
>>Can charge my phone, laptop and earbud case with one charger
soulless

>>107258815
If you’re that much of a tinfoil, use a passive A to C adapter with an old charger so the device only sees 500mA.
>>107260819
What the fuck are you talking about. It will have to go through the whole 1.1->2->PD negotiation dance regardless.

>>107260658
the specs are not the problem, its cheap chinese manufacturers pumping out out-of-spec garbage
> Different charging capacities per cable
all in-spec usb type c cables support at least 60 W
> Different features specs per cable
there are two flavours according to the specifications, usb 2.0- only and full-featured
> Labeling differences unclear because manufacturers are niggers and don't write them on the cable itself
following the specification you have to label the cable with the maximum supported power
> Spec was PD limited to 100w up until recently which is absurd.
if by recently you mean 2021

>>107259905
Based communists, I want to charge my phone with a DB9

>>107259807
>this knife is too sharp, it keeps cutting up my family
Have you considered skill issue?

>>107259905
Agreed, but fwiw USB-C is an acceptable endgame for wired connectors. The EU restriction will push innovation for wireless power and near-range data.

>>107261494
It's a DE-9 you retard. A B shell is far too large for only 9 pins.

>>107261563
You're just giving away that you're too young to have actually used the connector, DB-9 is wrong but it's common usage. Glad you read the wikipedia article though.

>>107258783
>it's time to play:
>"is it power-only, usb 2.0, usb 3.1 or lightning!"
>the game where you have no hdmi port but must get your display on the big screen!

>falls out if you breathe on it
Utter shit

It’s a based design but it’s becoming fragmented like the others before it on data transfer speeds with no clear labeling on the cable
how am I to know which cables can do usb4 vs usb3.2 or even usb3 data rates? I’ve got cables buying vapes or simple electronics that don’t even work with data transfers and power only. They’re not marked on what they are or what they can do so when they get tossed in the cuck bin of other cables you play russian roulette finding the right one

>>107261485
>What the fuck are you talking about. It will have to go through the whole 1.1->2->PD negotiation dance regardless.
Anon is talking about devices that solely use a USB port as a replacement for a DC jack.
For some (crap) devices the type C port is only connected with power pins with no enable resistor or PD negotiation.
Those devices require a type A port charger which always has 5V enabled.

File: lightning-connector-burne(...).jpg (164 KB, 1240x827)

164 KB JPG

>>107259028
>lightning was the perfect connector
*4th pin burns*

>>107259028
back when it first shipped yeah but once usbc became mainstream (and eurocuck mandated) it was no longer viable
they never moved beyond usb2 data transfer speeds anyways. If they had jumped on the jewtel games of proprietary cables (ie thunderbolt) maybe, but it’s best to sit out the small shit. Lightning was just the pre usbc to keep their Apple stuff synced with one connector while the plebes fought it out to develop a standard

Tl;dr there’s more poor people than rich so when one standard is mass adopted and the peasants can afford it, it will always win
Case in point HD-dvd vs blu-ray (hd-dvd was superior in every way) but you scape goat in a cheap mass produced product to the sheep then you become the standard

>>107262155
You'd rather have a 20 year shelf-life than region locking?