this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
531 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

59596 readers
3055 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hcbxzz@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Perhaps a controversial opinion here, but the usefulness of reversibility is vastly overrated. It's not a game changer, just a tiny first-world luxury that's nice to have, but it does it by introducing a bunch of unnecessary complexity that I'd rather avoid. Not worth the trade off IMO. I can count on one hand the number of minutes USB-C has saved me by being reversible and I honestly don't care

[–] Ejh3k@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm happier with how long usb c last before they start getting finicky than I am the reversiblity.

[–] hcbxzz@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

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 with my phone for 10+ years with no issues, and I've 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. I wish they made a larger version of the Type C port. Same shape, same pins, just bigger in every dimension. As large as Type A, for durability.

I'm not a big fan of Apple, but the lightning connector is just better, physically. It's way more durable in practice since it's just a solid piece. I wish USB-C was designed that way instead of what we actually got.

[–] cheery_coffee@lemmy.ca 6 points 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.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] hcbxzz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's not going to get you Thunderbolt, mate

[–] dgriffith@aussie.zone 1 points 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?

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The issue is that USBC was the first standard to really take the mechanical design process seriously in a consumer context. In doing so, it was made both way more ergonomic and way more durable. I'd argue that without the focus on some of these "small but marketable" consumer-oriented bits, we would not have gotten the great overall connector design we did.

[–] hcbxzz@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m not a big fan of Apple, but the lightning connector is just better, physically. It’s way more durable in practice since it’s just a solid piece. I wish USB-C was designed that way instead of what we actually got.

[–] owatnext@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

If I recall correctly, Lightning connectors are designed in a way that makes the port more likely to wear out. USB-C is designed in a way that makes the cable more likely to wear out. I would rather replace my $5 charging cable than replace my $150 (or more!) phone.

[–] jackalope@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Engineering centric worldview versus user centric worldview.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I am just laughing here because I spent the day dealing with ancient serial tech pigtails and DB9s. You people have no idea the pain of losing multiple days of your life trying to get RS-232 to work. Especially when stuff doesn't follow the standards it is supposed to follow.

[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, you're right: that was controversial.