Comment

Comment on USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible

In theory, USB-C should be better, but in practice, the quality control is all over the place.

All of my micro USB cables and ports have lasted just fine. I used one daily for 10 years with no issues, and only had maybe two cables ever actually fail. Meanwhile, I’ve already had at least 5 USB-C cables or dongles that have fully failed, and plus the primary USB-C charging port on a laptop just completely die. I wish it was better, but it just isn’t.

Also if USB-C was just replacing just micro USB I’d be ok with that. But the problem is they’re also replacing USB-A, and Type C is not nearly as durable as Type A since it’s so small, it’s just physically impossible.

source

Sort:hotnew top

cheery_coffee@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
I’ve never had a good experience with micro-USB, mini USB was meh, but for whatever reason the stuff using micro was always bad.

source
Natanael@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
They exist

www.startech.com/en-se/cables/usb3sab10m

source
- hcbxzz@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  That’s not going to get you Thunderbolt, mate
  
  source
dgriffith@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
USB C was designed so that the spring contacts that wear out/get damaged are in the relatively cheap cable, and the solid, more durable tang that the contacts slide on is in the expensive device.

Now let’s have a look at Apple’s design for their lightning connector… hmm I wonder why they designed it like that?

source