• Belazor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Speaking as an Apple user - I am heavily invested in their ecosystem - I am extremely happy that Lightning is on death’s door. I fully agree with the EU and I am very grateful to them for forcing Apple’s hand.

    That being said, your point about USB-A falls apart when you consider any situation where your vision is even partially obstructed. Such as; back of the computer, back of your monitors, a dock unless you’re holding it, etc etc.

    What I’m hoping will happen:

    1. Apple sells only USB-C to USB-C cables
    2. Apple users start requesting more USB-C ports on motherboards / desktop computers
    3. Mouse/Keyboard manufacturers produce USB-C alternatives of their products
    4. Motherboards move even more to USB-C
    5. GOTO 3 until USB-A becomes as legacy as VGA or PS/2
    6. We hopefully never see another single orientation external cable ever again.

    A lad can dream…

    • TwilightKiddy
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You don’t need to check female port orientation, it’s always the same, pins inside the port are looking at the board the connector is soldered to. Of course, unless manufacturer decided to do something funny, but no standard is protected from that.

          • Belazor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not sure I understand your point. You can make a USB stick that fries your hardware too, that doesn’t mean Kingston is going to make all of their pen drives fry your hardware.

            Is this some kind of “acshully I’m technically correct because it’s theoretically possible” thing?

            • TwilightKiddy
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The point is that manufacturers can screw up standards and being a symmetrical connector does not cure idiocy in the heads if some people. Yes, the standard explicitly says you have to short opposing data lines for 2.0, but that does not mean everybody will comply with it. (The author of the video is not an idiot, they just demonstrated that it’s possible)

              The most common example of this I can think of right away is male-male connectors with type A USB. They are explicitly prohibited, yet many manufacturers create them and use in their products.

              That’s why I said that no standard can protect you, you’re just relying on people not being dumb and actually reading the paper you published.

              • Belazor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Right, I see your point, thank you for clarifying :)

                That being said, unlike the male-to-male example, where I personally don’t understand why the spec prohibits it, I think it’s pretty obvious why consumers want USB-C. The Internet is awash with memes about inserting USB three times, etc.

                I think there’s a vast difference between “why is male-male banned? Heck it, I’ll create one as it serves our use case” and “I’m going to negate the only consumer-facing advantage USB-C has for no real reason”. Yes I know C has many other benefits but the common denominator doesn’t care about any of that.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Except they could, by making USB-C standard. Now even though I’m dumb as fuck I never have to remember plug orientation!

            • TwilightKiddy
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Don’t worry, I’m quite sure your kind will find something to trip over eventually. No thing can be fully dumb-proof.