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

ooli@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.world – 571 points –
USB inventor explains why the connector was not designed to be reversible
pcgamer.com
241

You are viewing a single comment

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.

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?

1 more...