Is this actually supposed to replace even type A? I think it's

>>57208377
its not going to, motherboards are just adopting it its not picking up real well

>>57208398
That's great to know.

File: usb_types.jpg (38KB, 450x180px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 450x180px

>>57208377
Personaly i never could understand why USB is so big...Maybe cause it was designed by intelpajeet.
Ein USB everywere. Stop with this shit with dozens of connectors.

>>57210425
Go back to year 1995 you retard, and look at connectors used back then. Then ramble something about it being big compared to COM and LPT.

And USB-A is great, it's very robust. Although even it can be made in low quality, I see that a lot of people break the front ports in cheap cases. Those are probably badly made, because I've never seen a backpanel USB port that would not work.

The only crap in USB land is the micro and mini ports that faggot phones introduce. USB-A is good and the original port.

>>57210515
mini ports are pretty good but micro is pure trash unless you have a good cable

>>57210515
>USB-A is great
It's shit.

>>57208398

>its not going to

It will. Once every new computer includes it then it's only a matter of time before smart phone makers replace type-A on their cables.

>>57210684
this is exactly what a millenial would say. go back to eating shit

>>57208398
is this your first time seeing a breaking change get adopted?

the type C adoption rate is going pretty much at par with history. it just seems slow to children who have no frame of reference

>>57210743
Even autistic could figure out its to wide and high, and might be way smaller. But not intel pajeet...he probably used first stupid idea he had.

>>57210808
>Too wide and high
Yet it allows for more pins to be added each generation, making it backwards compatible.
Type A is based

>>57210808
>doesn't even deny it
Why do tech illiterate macfags even browse /g/?

>>57210961
>plz rate my homescreen

I pray type C catches on. Something less retarded pls.

How does it compare to Lightning?

File: 1406685659319.jpg (899KB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

899KB, 2448x2448px

The world will be a better place once Type C is literally everything

>>57210743
millenials are the new boomers

Are there any interesting devices that use type C?

>>57211731
interesting in what sense?

do you appreciate how meaningless your question is when you use adjectives like that?

Type C yes please. Reversible plug? Tb3 at 40gbps? Literally why tf not?

>>57211786
the only reason is that it breaks backwards compatibility which has been a feature of USB for a long time.

but those of us that were using technology in the 90s know that breaking changes are a fact of life, and breaking changes in hardware are grueling and painful but necessary, like setting a broken bone.

i'm not excited about the pain of all of these upgrades, all of the cables i've got that will become garbage someday soon, and the adapter hell that i'll undoubtedly go through. still, it's a necessary pain, and it's for a good cause.

my life was made measurably better by the switch from PATA to SATA and i don't even deal with that shit on a daily basis. imagine how much of a delta Type C will represent.

>>57211762
Interesting as in not just using type C for common devices like portable storage, smartphones, etc. An example would be a mug warmer.

>>57211991
a mug warmer would be using type C as a source of power. do you mean a charging device that uses type C?

>>57208377
Half of the USB cables at work are already USB C, with all the Nexus phones and MacBooks we have.

>>57212002
It would be able to use power and benefit from the data speed like a mug warmer that produces thermal imaging of your beverage.

File: image.jpg (217KB, 960x1637px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 960x1637px

>>57210743
>muh generations

>>57211991
USB-PD would greatly benefit such devices, some mobos support it already

>>57211991
New bee T1 earbuds
Never tried them so they may be shit. I also remember seeing another pair of type c earbuds on kickstarter.
Aren't there monitors that can use type c for power?

>>57211229
Does lightning have this?
https://thunderbolttechnology.net/blog/thunderbolt-3-usb-c-does-it-all

I'm okay with USB C. Hopefully it will end up replacing everything. It's just big enough that you can reasonably use it without it bending or breaking, so there won't be a need to go smaller, Apple anus notwithstanding.

>>57212961
Fuck that website.

>>57210558

This. Mini ports were sturdy as fuck.

>>57208398
Remember when desktops only had two USB ports?

How many does your desktop have now?

File: 2016-10-14 00.50.26.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

>>57210425
>Complaining about why USB is too large.
Underage.

>tfw bought a htc10 only because it had usbc

>>57213786
Fuck you fucking bitch. Thunderbolt 3 and usb-c are the new standard. Accept it or I will fuck your butt. Faggot.

type C connectors have a nice snug feeling when you connect them.

Micro USB connectors start to loosen up after about a dozen reinserts until they just start falling out.

>>57214342
Lok at how many pins they holding. USB A have just four and is almost as big as db9, or db15.

>>57211991
It seems the new console by Nintendo uses it

>>57214364
well congrats on buying the best phone of 2016.

>>57208377
>I think it's way too brittle and unsuitable for anything bigger.
t. hasn't used a type-c connector.

>>57210425
USB is big because the plug is designed to last a long god damn time.

HDMI, for example, isn't rated for as many insertions as a USB Type-A, the contacts are much smaller and the socket is less robust.

Type C is more similar to HDMI than Type-A. Your sockets will fuck up well before any Type-A sockets do.

i still don't even own any usb3 devices, letalone anything with type-c ports

File: CAB-OCT-V35-MT-500x500.jpg (36KB, 500x312px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x312px

>>57214342

post big cables

It will standardize laptop chargers like microusb did for phones.

>>57210558
Mini wasn't good because the stress was on the port and not the cable, whereas with micro it is the opposite.

>>57215582
My phone uses a Type-C connector. It's way too tiny, I can't possibly see how this would work for pretty much anything you plug into a desktop or laptop computer, and it has a little tongue inside that will easily break.

>>57210425
I've never in my life seen or used a type B usb cable. Type A, mini and micro are that I thought existed (besides type c)

>>57216002
>usb-c is bigger than micro usb
>usb-c is reversible so you can plug it any way
>somehow you went retard mode and can't accomplish plugging in the cable while you did it fine with micro usb.

>>57216013
its the cable used for printers.

>>57216015
I agree it's more robust than USB-micro, but it's way more fragile than Type-A.

>>57216026
>>57216013
My devices with Type B:
* old 3.5" USB 2.0 disk enclosure
* laser printer
* really old scanner

>>57214342
lel imagine that shit on a modern smartphone

>>57216063
HAHAHA

>>57210558
Mini cables destroyed the port instead of the connector retard

>>57215944
was just about to post this. Horrific. And they're only just starting to be phased out.

File: connector-t28_big[1].jpg (11KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 300x300px

>>57216063
>if you only knew how bad things really are.jpg

>>57215578
Underrated post. HD audio, USB C, metal frame. LG G5 is DOA because of that modular shit and the V20 breaks easily. And Samsung, even if their shit didn't explode, can't compete in build quality and software. Too bad HTC can't market for shit and are dumping all their cash into the Vive.

>>57210425
USB was far smaller than the parallel connectors it replaced, and different connectors had different reasons.

Type A (first on the left on your pic) was for hosts (e.g. computers). Type B was supposed to indicate a device side (e.g. printer/scanner, the second from the left in your pic).

Then devices started getting smaller, to the point where the USB port was preventing them from getting any thinner. So they made Mini USB A and B. Many devices used a receptacle that could use an A or B cable, but most of them shipped with B cables. Mini USB was A) Not thin enough and B) Not designed with enough unplug re-plug cycles for portable devices (up to 1,000).

So then they made MicroUSB, which was much smaller, and moved the most sensitive part of the connection (e.g. to break) on the cable, with support for 10,000 unplug/replug cycles. Except the connector fit only one way (people liked reversibility of Apple lightning) and the connectors often failed anyways.

Based on reversability and what they learned from prior connectors, we now have USB-C, and we decided to bite the bullet and make this the potential connector for device side while allowing compatibility from USB-A to USB-C.

>>57215944
If I rip that off will the screw holes die?

>>57216107
>Except the connector fit only one way (people liked reversibility of Apple lightning) and the connectors often failed anyways.
If only they had made type c back then

>>57216038
The picture shows a USB 3.0 type-b not a 2.0.

They are actually quite common.

>>57216133
My new monitor has one of those to connect the usb 3 ports all over it.

>>57216097
I had a Nokia back in the day. I meant the full size port.

>>57208377
They should just make a bigger type C and label the current one Micro C

File: 800px-A_Micro-A_USB_port.jpg (69KB, 800x1066px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 800x1066px

> micro A exists

What?

File: firewire-6-pin.jpg (21KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 600x600px

>>57216129
Even if it wasn't reversible, Firewire had non-even corner that meant orientation was a lot easier to spot. It was also objectively a better standard in a lot of ways than USB was (power quantities in standard, maximum practical throughput and consistency, etc.)... but, firewire required more loyalties and logic ($$$) on the device side

Hindsight is a bitch. Apparently the reason the original USB Type A connector was not made reversible was the cost (would have required eight pins instead of four), although another school of thought is - they simply didn't think of it.

>>57216168
So we can have even more types of cables, when USB Type-C to C can handle notebook charging levels of power? Why?

>>57215961
It could if they can get everyone on board for power delivery, I think manufacturers will still want their accessory cut.

>>57216212
>Why?
Just a sturdier, thiccer connection.

>>57216203
The USB-IF saw a future where you'd have thinner host side devices, but that didn't really pan out too much and USB Type-A was used for backwards compatibility with all the shit everyone had (e.g. computers, existing chargers). With Type C and USB Power Delivery (and the need to bite the bullet on ditching a certain amount of backwards compatibility if you want to use certain portions of the standard) you have a real carrot and reason there.

>>57216225
Thickness doesn't equal sturdy. Serial cables and DVI/VGA can unplug annoyingly without screw in. HDMI, for instance, isn't really any sturdier than mini display port (a far smaller connector).

File: Reversible_Micro-B_connector_plig.jpg (54KB, 615x492px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 615x492px

>>57216129
>>57216212
Oh, this exists

>>57216030
USB type A is way more fragile than DB9.

>>57208377
I would like to think so, it sure is nice on tablets and laptops since it gives the opportunity to use the benefits of dockingstations without the hassle of updating them when you update your pc.

>>57216439
Sure, but it's still pretty robust. Type-C looks like it was only designed with the mobile meme in mind.

File: 2-0mm-to-USB-Charging-plug-Adapter-font-b-Cable-b-font-for-font-b-Nokia.jpg (67KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1000x1000px

>People calling new USB cables fragile and small.

Remember when this fucking thing came to the market and replaced it's bigger counterpart?
We lived through it just fine and the small Nokia charger was 1/5th of the size of the Type-C.

There's nothing wrong with ditching the fuckhuge USB cable with something reversible and smaller.
Also fuck the Micro-B and fuck it hard.
The faster that abomination gets replaced with a new standard that can do it's job, the better.
Type-C can't come fast enough.

I doubt type-A will ever completely disappear, since so much shit uses it. It'll be there for backwards compatibility. But I am confident that type-C will become the main connector. It's small, so you can easily fit a larger number of type-C connectors, and most devices being released in the present and future will be type-C.

File: madasfuck.png (8KB, 374x208px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 374x208px

>>57216957
Why the fuck does every damned poster in this thread seem to only think about mobile shit?!

>>57216982
do motherboards use type C yet?

>>57217011
Because that's the most common use for cables nowadays? If it works for mobile, why wouldn't it work for desktops? Or large televisions? Or literally anything.

>>57217011

Because mobile shit is what you actually move around and handle a lot and the thing that you'll most likely break.
Or what, you're saying that you can't plug in your fucking printer through the smaller standard?
What the hell is stopping you?

If your problem is that you're afraid of breaking it, then stop kicking your computer and peripherals around.
There's 100x less chance of you destroying something connected to your computer, compared to your mobile.
If it works for your phone, it sure as fuck will work for your scanner.

>>57217063
>>57217051
Different anon, but micro B is flimsy as shit. It barely stays stuck in its port and very easily comes out

>>57217212

Micro-B is cancer.
I have never had a cable or a product that didn't have massive problems staying connected.
If I so much as touch any of the externals that have the Micro-B in them, they'll instantly disconnect.
That connector can't become obsolete fast enough.

>>57217212
You're right. Micro B is bad for everything, including mobile devices.

>>57216038
Also, Arduino Uno and other variants.

>>57214332
>Remember when desktops only had two USB ports

My laptop only has one USB port.