Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

Dev.SN ♥ developers

posted by n1 on Thursday April 03 2014, @07:32AM   Printer-friendly
from the new-better-than-old dept.

Intel has released a rendering of the new USB Type C connector, which is reversible so no more jokes about "USB cables exist in the fourth dimension". The new connector is smaller than the Type A connector that we're all used to seeing on our desktops and laptops and looks to be slightly larger than the micro-B connector found on most smart phones and tablets.

From the article:

Unlike today's USB connectors, which requires a user to correctly orient the plug, USB 3.1 Type-C cable is reversible. Initially, the USB 3.1 Type-C specification will support up to 10Gbps data transfer speeds.

The Type-C connector and cable will support scalable power charging in order to grow with future USB bus performance requirements. The first iteration will have a 5 volt power transfer rate, but that is expected to deliver up to 100 watts for higher power applications.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 03 2014, @07:43AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 03 2014, @07:43AM (#25463)

    > released a rendering of the new USB Type C connector, which is reversible so no more jokes about "USB cables exist in the fourth dimension".

    Yay, now we have vaporware. Much better.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by carguy on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:20AM

      by carguy (568) on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:20AM (#25479)

      > Yay, now we have vaporware. Much better.

      And if anyone tries to draw 100 Watts from that tiny connector...smoke ware!

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Hairyfeet on Thursday April 03 2014, @07:47AM

    by Hairyfeet (75) <reversethis-{moc ... {8691tsaebssab}> on Thursday April 03 2014, @07:47AM (#25464)

    So its the same speed as USB 3, yet breaks backwards compatibility so nothing that I own will actually work with the thing? Wel let me say...how about NO Intel, how about that? If a user is so damned dumb they can't plug a one way plug in the right way frankly they shouldn't be using outlets (one way for 100+ years) much less a computer and if the ONLY thing you can bring to the table is the breaking of a standard that works so well that you can take a USB 1.0 device and plug it into a USB 3.0 port without even having to wonder if it'll work? Sorry but that is worthless, please move along.

    I only hope like Firewire and that thunderport or whatever its called you cooked up with Apple it gets duly ignored by the OEMs, no OEMs no port.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by githaron on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:35AM

      by githaron (581) on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:35AM (#25484)

      The more important feature is the new power options. Right now, a lot of tablets can not power off your computer's USB because the standard's power output is too low. They end up making non-standard cords that must use a wall-based charger.

    • (Score: 2) by morgauxo on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:37AM

      by morgauxo (2082) on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:37AM (#25519)

      I love the idea of a reversible cable. No, I'm not dumb. I usually go to bed after my wife. The last thing I do is place my phone on a stand next to the bed and plug it in. I try to do it in the dark without disturbing her. I think a reversible connector might help.

      As for obsoleting standards and all that, I do understand your concern. At least it's only a mechanical change, not an electrical one. How hard is an adapter?

      Personally I would like to see one new connector standard. I want something with HDMI plus USB OTG but unlike MHL I want it to do both at the SAME TIME! Better yet, keep them separate connectors but standardize their orientation in relation to one another and the distance between them. Then plugs could be made that do both while still maintaining the ability to use them separately.

      • (Score: 2, Funny) by middlemen on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:50AM

        by middlemen (504) on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:50AM (#25537)

        I usually go to bed after my wife.[SNIP]I try to do it in the dark without disturbing her.

        I do it in the dark with your wife too but before you go to bed...

      • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:07AM

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:07AM (#25614)

        What I want to know is: why the heck did it take them this long to standardize on a reversible connector for USB? OK, I'll give them a pass for USB1.0, and maybe 1.1, but after that when USB started getting used for everything, and people complained about how it only goes in one way, but the rectangular shell doesn't make it obvious which way, they should have made a reversible connector for the newer standards. Instead, we went through the mini, micro, 2.0, and 3.0 connectors/standards before we finally got here, over the course of about 2 decades.

        • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:57AM

          by tangomargarine (667) on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:57AM (#25652)

          Or hell, just add a bit of plastic filler to the sides of the plug "casing" (or whatever you call it) so the whole plug assembly is trapezoidal like the microUSB plug. Then standardize on devices "narrow side = up or to the right."

          --
          A Discordian is Prohibited of Believing what he reads.
        • (Score: 0) by contrapunctus on Thursday April 03 2014, @02:23PM

          by contrapunctus (3495) on Thursday April 03 2014, @02:23PM (#25726)

          Because they saw the lightning connector and facepalmed.

          • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday April 03 2014, @02:36PM

            by Grishnakh (2831) on Thursday April 03 2014, @02:36PM (#25741)

            Or, why didn't they just make a non-rectangular connector to begin with? The original FireWire connector wasn't rectangular; it was plainly obvious which way it went in (and trying to insert it backwards wouldn't work, nor would it damage the connector).

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 12 2014, @12:47PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 12 2014, @12:47PM (#27846)

        JAbt6X vfzjabgiyweb [vfzjabgiyweb.com], [url=http://bwvhcrrubbrr.com/]bwvhcrrubbrr[/url], [link=http://qkhmqadcwppb.com/]qkhmqadcwppb[/link], http://ddcapudxihdz.com/ [ddcapudxihdz.com]

    • (Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday April 03 2014, @02:35PM

      by Tork (3914) on Thursday April 03 2014, @02:35PM (#25739)

      If a user is so damned dumb they can't plug a one way plug in the right way...

      I'm one of those 'so damned dumb' people. I cannot plugin a USB cable without trying three times.

      --
      Slashdolt logic: 1600 x 1200 > 1920 x 1200
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 03 2014, @07:47AM

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@soylentnews.org> on Thursday April 03 2014, @07:47AM (#25465) Journal
    I saw this a day or two ago and my first thought was along the lines of "Oh, that's going to make for really durable ports on my computer, not". You can make ports tiny or you can make them stand up to a fair amount of abuse, not both. It's just simple leverage vs the strength of the components and solder joints. USB A ports look to be 2-3x deeper than C, thus requiring significantly more applied force to cock them up.
    --
    123
    456
    789
    • (Score: 1) by guises on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:36AM

      by guises (3116) on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:36AM (#25636)

      For USB at least, the smaller ports are rated for larger numbers of insertions. I think it's 2,500 for type A, and 10,000 for micro.

      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 03 2014, @02:26PM

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@soylentnews.org> on Thursday April 03 2014, @02:26PM (#25729) Journal
        Good to know (someone +1 Informative Parent, please) but I was talking less about expected stress from normal use and more about unintended stress that IS going to happen like accidentally tripping on the cord of something connected to one of them.
        --
        123
        456
        789
  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Adrian Harvey on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:20AM

    by Adrian Harvey (222) on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:20AM (#25480)

    The current USB 3 micro connector is hideous
    See: for a picture... https://www.usbgear.com/images/USB3-MAMB.jpg [usbgear.com]
    So any replacement before there's too much of it in the market would be good.

    • (Score: 2) by Marneus68 on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:43AM

      by Marneus68 (3572) on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:43AM (#25491)

      Nice opinion you have there.

      The god thing about this "ugly" connector is that it's compatible with the standard Micro-USB connector, something that the new proposed connector can not do.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:08AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:08AM (#25616)

        In theory I like the Micro3 adapter. In practice, I see the average user "forcing" the connector if they don't line it straight at the port the first time resulting in the connector eventually being lifted from the circuit board. Basically what happened to the mini USB connectors on cell phones.

      • (Score: 2) by Adrian Harvey on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:10AM

        by Adrian Harvey (222) on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:10AM (#25619)

        Yes, I shortened my opinion to save on typing :-). I get that it's compatible, and that engineering limitations will have forced them in to design compromises, but as a result of those compromises:
        1. It's no longer micro (as in smaller than USB2 mini)
        2. It's relatively fragile (in my experience)
        3. It's not that easy to use the backwards compatibility as you have to carefully put the older cable into one half of the socket.

        All of these make it a poor choice for (to name one use) a mobile phone charge/sync cable. Apple doesn't do USB3 yet, so a reversible connector with fast sync would give the others a jump up.

        To some extent all the B type connectors chose an interesting route to adding extra connectors compared to the A type connectors. I can see why fitting extra pads into a micro connector might be a difficult job, but it's sad that the full size B couldn't be a clean upgrade too. I suspect that the cables being different already, a new connector was seen as not so bad.

  • (Score: 1) by DrMag on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:40AM

    by DrMag (1860) on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:40AM (#25488)

    The first iteration will have a 5 volt power transfer rate, but that is expected to deliver up to 100 watts for higher power applications.

    My physics degrees are failing me here... I really don't get what is meant by a "5 volt power transfer rate". From the image in the article, it appears to suggest it can handle up to 3A (so 15W, 5A/25W for the connectors themselves, which compares nicely with the 100W future target).

    I would hope it's not implying the 100W rate will come with an increase in voltage... that's really asking for trouble having a plug that's supposed to be universal connect devices to a port that's designed to use a much higher voltage than the device is itself designed to handle.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by cabraverde on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:56AM

      by cabraverde (3277) on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:56AM (#25501)

      If we're delivering 100W then I *do* hope we get more than 5V, because I personally do not want 20A of current flowing through such a small connector.

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by DrMag on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:12AM

        by DrMag (1860) on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:12AM (#25506)

        Fair enough.. But if they do that, they'll have to modify the current design of devices to be able to handle the, say, 20V/5A input in addition to the 5V/3A. I know I wouldn't like to try plugging my phone into that...

        "5 volt power transfer rate" still makes no sense.

        • (Score: 2) by Foobar Bazbot on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:46AM

          by Foobar Bazbot (37) on Thursday April 03 2014, @11:46AM (#25644)

          I expect that there will be some sort of negotiation -- the port will start at 5V, and every device must work at 5V (full functionality may need more, but at 5V it will enumerate and negotiate for more power). Then the device says what voltages it can handle. and the port increases the voltage to the maximum available in that range.

          This way dumb 5V chargers are still good, and hosts with only 5V available can continue to operate more-or-less as they do now, but hosts with higher rails available can deliver more power and/or deliver the same power more efficiently, but any devices that don't ask for more voltage still get the safe 5V. (And 5V being 3A means current devices that want 2A or 2.1A won't need special handling, while new ~10W devices will (hopefully) work from either 5V or 10/12/20/whatever.)

          Of course, some morons will inevitably release non-compliant high-voltage dumb chargers, but those already exist -- e.g. my Transformer tablet charges slowly at 5V or fast at 15V (over the same pins in the dock connector), so obviously it ships with one dock-connector/USB-A cable for both transferring data to a computer and charging, and a 15V wall wart with a USB-A female socket. At least if the standard specifies negotiation, there will be an option to make a smart, enumerating & negotiating high-voltage USB charger... (not that I really believe this will happen, any more than the standards-correct (pre-USB-IF BCS) smart USB chargers that would negotiate up to 500mA ever did.)

    • (Score: 2, Funny) by jcross on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:44AM

      by jcross (4009) on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:44AM (#25530)

      Yep, looks like a mistake in the FA as well. Voltage doesn't measure either a rate or power, so that can't be right. Also 100W seems like an awful lot! Can anyone think of an application for that? USB hair driers? Charging your phone so fast it catches on fire?

      • (Score: 2) by etherscythe on Thursday April 03 2014, @12:15PM

        by etherscythe (937) on Thursday April 03 2014, @12:15PM (#25663)

        I'm seeing an attempt to reduce cable clutter, and maybe enabling devices such as a RAID cages with only one or two connections back to the tower (as opposed to a mess of power adapters on the outlet strip). We won't really know what interesting applications come out until the connector becomes widespread, but having options for device manufacturers can only be a good thing.

      • (Score: 1) by Aiwendil on Thursday April 03 2014, @02:31PM

        by Aiwendil (531) on Thursday April 03 2014, @02:31PM (#25734)

        It's obvious, it is so you can charge the laptop via usb from the laptop itself and thereby solving all the pesky battery-problems... ;)

        But more seriously - Monitor 20-40w, speakers 10-30w, usb-drives 5-10w each. and suddenly you have hit the 100w limit (and that is before counting the draw of charging devices). This is of course only to solve the cable-clutter.

        Or for the DIY-crowd - running a 3d-printer from a single (powered) usb-hub.

  • (Score: 1) by scruffybeard on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:51AM

    by scruffybeard (533) on Thursday April 03 2014, @08:51AM (#25495)

    What if the user tries to insert the plug vertically? We need to account to all levels of silliness.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Rivenaleem on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:43AM

      by Rivenaleem (3400) on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:43AM (#25529)

      Yeah, it should be circular, like most laptop chargers, and headphones.

    • (Score: 1) by theluggage on Thursday April 03 2014, @12:36PM

      by theluggage (1797) on Thursday April 03 2014, @12:36PM (#25674)

      Perhaps they should fill it with explodium (you know, the stuff that they put in the control panels in Star Trek) so that it blows up in a shower of sparks if you get it wrong. That would teach people not to learn which way up USB plugs go.

      People who try to plug in micro-USB in the dark, or with poor eyesight, or around the back of a device should be punished. Only infallible super-humans should be allowed to use tech.

      ...or, maybe, designers should just make things nicer for everybody to use...?

  • (Score: 1) by boris on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:35AM

    by boris (1706) on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:35AM (#25515)

    Lets hope the new design is a little more resilient to every day use. My connectors seem to start failing after 3 months of use. I try all the tricks to extend their life, but in the end I end up buying another one.

    • (Score: 1) by Soluzar on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:44AM

      by Soluzar (311) on Thursday April 03 2014, @09:44AM (#25531)

      Working as intended. :P

  • (Score: 3, Funny) by egcagrac0 on Thursday April 03 2014, @10:01AM

    by egcagrac0 (2705) on Thursday April 03 2014, @10:01AM (#25551)

    "OK, I need you to unplug the cable, turn it upside down, and plug it back in again."

    This will be the new "have you tried turning it off and on again?"

  • (Score: 2) by tibman on Thursday April 03 2014, @01:17PM

    by tibman (134) on Thursday April 03 2014, @01:17PM (#25689)

    The flimsy bit that breaks is STILL inside the host device and not the cable. This was a good opportunity to fix that. I mean, it breaks compatibility anyways, might as well go all out.

    --
    SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.