They've been working on this for quite a while, since long before "lightning" was released. Standards take a lot longer to get worked out than proprietary ports. The idea that Apple drives every advance in technology is fallacious.
Yes, and this thing blows the lightning adapter out of the water in terms of power and bandwidth - pretty sure the lightning adapter is slower than their old fat connector because the HDMI adapters have a mini processor in them to decompress video because the adapter couldn't deliver.
Anyway, its kind of like Apple Pay - I'm sure people will give them praise for the whole technology, meanwhile Google, payment networks, acquires, EMV, and financial institutes have been working on tokenization for a long time now. Apple just had perfect timing, understood what they had to do with the iPhone and iOS, and used their power to say "1...2...3...JUMP". It is awesome, can't deny that, but to your point, we can't take everything from Apple at face value.
No. Thunderbolt 2, available right now in any Retina Macbook Pro and the Mac Pro is 20 Gbps, twice USB 3.1's 10 Gbps [1]. USB 3.1 won't be in products until 2015 (see article). In 2015, Thunderbolt 3 will come out and will be 40 Gbps [2].
You are referring to the Thunderbolt 1 HDMI adapter which down sampled the video because it was bandwidth limited. Thunderbolt 1 was 10 Gbps, just like USB 3.1.
Firstly the comparison is between the lighting connected and the USB-C connector and there's no contest. The USB-C wins where it matters by a fair margin.
Secondly thunderbolt is an Intel invention, not an Apple one. Apple was an early adopter.
Actually, Thunderbolt came as a partnership between Intel and Apple. Apple approached them with the technology, and asked Intel to build it so that it wouldn't go the way of FireWire.
Sorry but this thread is about Lightning, which is the last iPhone/iPad connector, and not about Thunderbold, which of course blows out USB 3.1 in term of speed and video signal capabilities. They're talking about a reversible connector, which Thunderbolt is not.
(And I don't think Thunderbold / Mini Display Port to HDMI was downsampling anything, at least, not at 1080p)
thunderbolt 2 rly didnt add extra bandwidth. thunderbolt 1 has 2 10gbit channels but if ur only using 1 it still runs at 10gbps thunderbolt 2 allows you to bond the channels together to give you 20gbps but if u are using both channels its still 10 gbps.
My problem with this connector is the same problem I have with micro-USB: the connectors are too fragile! I've had quite a few USB to micro-USB cables go bad on me, where wiggling the connector in my phone (or even touching it) can cause a disconnect to happen. From that standpoint, I think the Lightning connector looks a lot more robust. This is a case where smaller isn't always better -- the big USB connectors rarely gave me any trouble, mini-USB was pretty reliable, but micro-USB has been far more flaky in my experience. Anyone else have that problem?
i had problems with the reliability of micro usb connectors too on my phone for some time. but to be honest, my experiences with mini usb haven't been much better.
but then i remembered, that i once had problems getting a good connection with my headphones. it turned out that there was a bit of pocket lint accumulated in the hole over time. i took it out with with my needle nose tweezers, which solved the problem back then.
lo and behold, pocket lint was the culprit with the bad usb connection too! it took a couple minutes to ply and scratch and blow it all out, but now my usb cables work like champs again!
you should power down your device when performing this operation though and maybe even take out your battery, if that's possible, otherwise you risk shorting out the contacts to ground.
Micro-USB cables are fragile on purpose so they don't destroy the connectors on the PCB in your devices, like what happened continuously with Mini-USB. Much easier to replace a $3 cable a couple time than re-solder a USB connector to your phone's mainboard.
I feel the lightning connector is perfect in terms of durability and size. There's nothing in the female port itself unlike the microusb female connector so you could jam the male side in harder without worrying about breaking off the pins on the inside.
I think USB Type C connector should have less disconnection issues (not that I ever had any). They have pins on both sides, this redundancy should make them more reliable (i.e. when moving the connector, there are less chance of disconnecting both opposed pins than disconnecting a unique pin).
In response to Jarred: Every microUSB car charger I've ever owned has failed at the connector after some amount of use. And it was definitely NOT an issue with dirt/lint/corrosion. I now buy car chargers that have removable cables for *when* (not if) they start having connectivity problems. The car charger is a worst-case scenario for a microUSB cable. It is often being tugged on and the phone is physically resting on the cable connection when sitting in someone's cupholder.
SUMMARY: The male ends of MicroUSB cables are definitely NOT robust. But I've never had problems with the internal socket on a phone or other gadget. I hope both sides of the connection are more robust this time around.
My daughter went through quite a few lightning cables for her iPhone 5. She has learned to treat the cables a bit more delicately and hasn't had one go bad for a while. I also quit buying cables directly from Apple, since Apple's appear to be cheaply made and not particularly durable.
I've had a number of micro-usb cables go bad, as well, but mostly because abuse like getting stepped on on the car floor and having the connector bent, which no small cable can survive.
Yes, micro-USB is a nightmare for anyone using it over a few hundred cycles (um, smartphones). It was claimed to be better than Mini USB but is simply garbage. Actually *any* nonlocking connector for high speed data is garbage: remember how DP was advertised as locking when it came out? Lies, lies...sigh. Actually HDMI is the *very* worst, if you blink it falls out. Thunderbolt is made with tighter specs, but they *all* fail the lock test unless you buy a $$$ locking connector cable.
I've had a number of micro-USB chargers or connectors fail. I've never been sure whether someone stepped on the tip, or why they stopped working.
And you're right... I've never had a failure with the previous types of chargers/connectors. However, my husband & son in law bought the Samsung Note 3 last fall. The chargers have USB 3.0 Micro B connectors. Both of their chargers failed in less than a year. I don't know if this is a reflection on Samsung's manufacturing, or on the durability of this type of wire.
Yes! Still waiting for a small connector as reliable as magsafe. We have seen many of the micro-usb jacks and cables quickly become broke or worse yet, intermittent, because they are just not sturdy enough. Worst case scenario is the new Macbook announced in March 2015 which has no mag-safe power connector, but just one (count'em one!) type-C connector which is the only way to charge the battery. The connector spec allows for upto 100 watts of power, which means a fairly thick cable going to a fragile connector. As soon as the receptacle on this macbook is broken/worn-out/intermittent, the macbook just became an expensive brick. I wish those apple engineers who supposedly were involved in the design of this connector took "Strain-relief 101" section of mechanical engineering. You never want the weight or tension of a cable conveyed to a connector, but that is the problem with most of these smaller connectors. This can be alleviated if the jack can be recessed so the cable can snap into a cable holder that takes all the weight/force of the cable, conveying none of it to the jack/receptacle. I also actually like the plug on the current iPhone cable, which looks like the edge-connector of a small circuit board having just gold-plated traces, no mechanical gold plated fingers. Probably more expensive, but all the mechanical bugs have been worked out of edge-connectors for decades now (or else your ram would not work!). We'll have to see how reliable this type-c connector is, but my first impressions was same as original poster: looks like it would be fragile and very prone to failure. Especially with a hefty power-supply cable.
On another forum someone commented: "Sad to see MagSafe go, but Apple brining their 18 engineers to the USB consorcium to come up with reversible USB-C connector as common standard is highly appreciated."
Apple's white power-bricks with mag-safe have seen several generations of improvement to help reduce problems such as torn insulation, internal wires breaking, etc. Mostly they have stiffened the cable several times so as to prevent it from being bent to a small radius. The stiffened cable does not cause issues with the magsafe connector. But such a stiff cable on the C connector would be a big mechanical strain on such a small receptacle that at least appears to be fragile. If you are going to provide 100 watts thru a connector system, one of the top priorities would be for it to be mechanically sturdy.
Apple released Lightning in September 2012. Do you think USB 3.1 wasn't in the works before that?
A new spec with double speed and 20x power delivery isn't developed in 2 years. If that was the case, USB 3.1 wouldn't be only a 10 Gbps interface, but 20 Gbps in line with Thunderbolt 2 (Intel's propietary proposal).
Last I checked Lightning is an Intel thing, and it uses up precious PCIe lanes, uses expensive active cables, and has an expensive header system. This makes it impractical to use on most bottom-feeder PCs, and as there are not many external devices that use the standard the high-end market is largely ignoring it, or only allowing it as an expansion card (or riser card as it is all hosted on the CPU in the first place). In a mac where you pretty much never use expansion cards it makes lightning cables extremely useful as it is the only way to get high end peripherals for your system... but in the PC world you simply have other cheaper options at hand. Anywho, just saying it is not an apple thing.
It's easy for Apple to rush development for interfaces like Thunderbolt (which is an Intel-developed technology) because Apple doesn't need to worry about anything other than Apple products.
USB needs to be compatible with multiple OS's, hardware, software, OEM's, developers, manufacturers, and so on. It's much easier to develop an interface for a few products (iPhone/iPad lightning, iMac/Macbook/Mac Pro thunderbolt) than thousands of products, all of which need to go through validation on various different schedules.
Apple is like a Mercedes S class which often gets the cool gizmo's first (first with airbags, ABS, stability control, radar cruise control, rain sensing wipers, multi-stage seat belt pretensioners, electronic braking distribution, brake assist, lane guidance, and so on.
The problem with being first is you are the most expensive, and your product isn't as refined as it later will be, usually by somebody else.
USB definitely needs to be compatible with multiple OS's etc etc etc.
But there is no change to the USB spec, just to the connector spec. This will not need any changes to USB drivers.. It is just a different plug and jack and cable.
Good thoughts. Another thing to consider is that Apple has their own goals for their devices and can control their own destiny. They were probably aware of this USB spec impending but not willing to wait the 2-3 years for industry ratification and ramp-up of it. They had to retire the 30 pin connector to save space in their newer devices and lightning is an improvement from the standpoint of users as well.
Actually the same suppliers and designers (they own the tech not Apple) is involved with both Lightning and USB 3.1 Type-C. Standardization do take some extra time.
I don't think it is important. Regardless, the Lightning connection/port is defective. Clearly not ALL of them go, but a large enough number that there are threads all over the place with people with dead Lightning connector devices (and cables).
I've given up on Apple until they switch to USB, after having my FOURTH Lightning device fail on me (not counting cables). iPhone 5s which lasted me 10 months (and probably only 10 months because I babied it so much.
I genuinely have had ZERO problems with lightning connectors or any of the lightning devices that I own. I know many people with the exact same experience. Two friends have had problems with their power buttons failing but apple swooped in with a recall on those.
I can help but think you are overdramatizing here or that you have an incredibly rough personal usage model. Either way, if you are running into that many failures I find it hard to believe that it is the device and not the user. I predict poor success with any mobile device - android or apple or Microsoft based - in your future.
What are ought to be appalled with is why Apple did not make a magsafe type connector instead of a plug!!!. (Obvious isn't it) Anything that had protruding parts and a non-flexible head-connect will be subjected to breakage. Apple knows the number of cable complains and their poor quality Lightning cables. Had they made a smaller magsafe connector (reversible) then those breakages will just go-away and cables lasts a lot longer like the older 30-pin connectors working well 6 years later!!!. The standard Lightning cable hardly last a year!. Magsafe was a great concept being able to break away on accidental trips on the cables or device!.
Two reasons: * MagSafe connectors are too big to fit mobile devices (they need a ring of magnets) * MagSafe connectors are not fail safe either, I had one broken by my 3 yr old and you can read happily on the net how many people try to replace their mag safe cables on their chargers.
Apple has managed to come up with a lot of things that probably should have been obvious, but were overlooked by the rest of the industry. It has usually been related to putting better user interfaces on products that had a lot of room for improvement in that area. A reversible connector is kind of along the same lines. It does the same thing as what was on other devices, but made using it a bit easier.
I had to double take and read that about 3 times before it clicked for me. It says it's an improvement that totals 1.25GB/s, which is equivalent to saying "to 10 from 5" or "from 5 to 10"
I use a USB3 hub which has a built in gigabit Ethernet port, which works great with my single port on the T100.
I get pretty close to gigabit even with transferring but looking forward to next hybrids similar which have USB3.1 ports. A gigabit for Ethernet and 3 gigabits each for the other ports.
I wonder how they get 100 watts from this connector (20 A at 5 V)? They must use several ground and power pins. It doesn't look like the PCB above would handle 100 watts.
They wont deliver 100 W at 5 V. USB 3.1 added 12 V and 20 V on top of the standard 5 V. Both new voltages have a limit of 5 A. So ju can draw 60 W at 12 V or 100 W at 20 V. The device needs to request the higher voltages so 5 V will continue to be the standard.
IIRC, the USB power delivery spec will be up to 10W using 5V (IE 2A), then up to 20W using 10V (IE 2A again) and up to 100W using 24V (IE 4A). No way could you make a realistic cable and connector to handle 20A, so you've gotta increase the voltage.
It auto negotiates the voltage and ameperage when connecting.
It should be noted that while USB Type-C connectors may not be quite as small as MicroUSB 2.0, they're substantially smaller than any of the prior USB 3.0 connectors.
It depends what 'smaller' means. I took it to mean it'll be a bit thicker. Obviously a wide-but-thin connector would be ideal on phones that need to be ultra-thin. Honestly, though, I think I'd appreciate the increased thickness for something like this.
You need high quality connections for high bandwidth signaling like this. If there's a slightly poor connection it could kill the 10Gbit signaling but the same poor connection might work just fine for legacy 480Mbit.
"Finally, USB Type-C extensions mean that it's possible to do all kinds of interesting applications over USB ports, such as sending audio and video data. It's even possible for a USB Type C port to send PCI-E data through the connection for use cases such as a two in one convertible tablet."
Is it bad if my first thought was that maybe, just maybe, this'd make external GPUs viable? Perhaps a single port wouldn't be enough, but if you can use two in parallel you could theoretically have both power and data go through USB purely. That'd be rather neat.
The PCIe v2 x16 (standard desktop GPU) has 64 Gbps throughput, so we're a bit off. On the other hand, the SLI and Crossfire sometimes use only half that throughput (PCIe v2 x8) for the second GPU. So three or four connectors would work. Though i would only use them for data and put a standard PSU in the case that would house the GPU. That way you keep the price down and you can do some serious gaming on any laptop.
Probably not for most gaming. Bandwidth is getting there; but USB doesn't have the QoS (latency and consistency) to avoid a bit of either latency or occasional lag bursts. For non-gaming use where 50-100ms for buffering isn't a major problem USB3 should be golden.
Thunderbolt GPUs have been attempted but haven't come to market in any meaningful sense. If they can't operate properly on Thunderbolt, then PCI-e over USB isn't likely to help.
"It's even possible for a USB Type C port to send PCI-E data through the connection for use cases such as a two in one convertible tablet."
Bye, Thunderbolt, it was nice knowing you. With this (USB3.1 + PCIe) and Dockport (DisplayPort + USB3.0) taking away both of its selling points (DisplayPort + PCIe) while adding more, I don't think that Intel can continue to justify its existence. Perhaps now we'll see more external GPU docks for laptops (PCIe over USB Type C connectors).
Don't worry, they have Apple. Apple will keep TB alive quite a while longer. They don't just up and switch when better things come along. They wait it out until their old tech becomes burdensome, and then come out with something all new, and usually unrefined, like TB was when it first hit.
When do you think we will start seeing phones with this appear? Is next year's GS6, M9, G4, etc too early? I know it says 2015 in the article, but when do you think it will become the standard for flagship phones?
Please make the new connector more durable. I have a lot of micro-usb connectors. Some was not reliable in the beginning. Some become less reliable over time. Now only 2-3 are actually working reliably, others are just not connecting or disconnecting all the time.
Agreed, I've been focused on hardware support for a university for 19 years now, and both the smaller USB form factors have had reliability problems due to mechanical weaknesses. Mini USB connectors fail often because the female connector is simply surface mounted to the internal PCB - solder on the legs of the internal connector are all that hold the ones I've seen in place. The male connector looks ok, hopefully the female jack is much more robust - especially since it'll be carrying much higher wattage in certain scenarios - arcing, depending on the pin configuration, will/should be a strong concern for those engineering the jack.
My chief concern with the type C connector is the actual design itself. Is there going to be a central pin in the female port that the male port fits around? That seems like a massive weak point for this connector if so. I guess if it is deep enough within the female port that you are forced to be in the correct angle by the time you reach it, then it will probably be resilient enough to stand up to day to days stress. That said, is there a reason not to design it like a lightning style connector where the male plug first and fills the female port completely without any weak points in the connection?
"That said, is there a reason not to design it like a lightning style connector where the male plug first and fills the female port completely without any weak points in the connection?"
Will this replace all usb connectors? Will we get motherboards with usb-c? Hubs? Keyboard, mouse and usbstick with usb-c? I hope so because those ports are irritating.
Eventually, yes. But it'll come to the high-end first - Asus' ROG boards, AsRock's Extreme series, etc. Last I checked, prebuilt mass-market PCs still don't commonly have USB3.
I can't speak for pre-built desktops, but to my knowledge, most mainstream laptops have been coming out with at least one USB 3.0 port since the Ivy Bridge days.
At this point it's worked its way down to bottom end laptops. I looked on Newegg and found a $199 Chrome Book and $239 windows laptop; both with at USB3 on one side.
Joshua, thanks for the review. It would be great if you could consider a follow-up review or article or addendum to this article discussing how stress and connection failures of previous microUSB connector specs have been solved or not with 3.1-C. More specifically, in previous USB connector implementations, most notoriously in microUSB, stresses in the connector were directly transferred to the solder joints in the microUSB connections on the PCB board. So if one wiggled the microUSB insert in any way, or failed to create an ad-hoc stress relief method for any microUSB cable inserted into a device (tape, cardboard, etc), then the stress of the connection would be directly transferred to the PSB solder joints and eventually fail.
Has this issue been robustly solved with USB 3.1 C?
Maybe I'm smarter than the average person, but I don't understand why a reversible connector is such a big deal. I frequently plug in my android phone or tablet to charge in the dark and never have any issues. Do people seriously have problems with this??
So how do you do it without seeing anything? Do you feel with your fingers to find the port and the orientation? Do you then feel the connector and the orientation? Compare that to doing the same with a mini-jack. If you think it has anything to do with intelligence you are pretty dumb.
Dear Josua, I read and enjoyed your post. Thanks for sharing. I took the freedom to reuse the pictures with credits and link at your post. Hope this is not a problem.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
91 Comments
Back to Article
HisDivineOrder - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
It's enough to make you wonder why it took Apple making Lightning to get them to realize this was an important thing to do (ie., reversible).Seems obvious. I guess everyone likes saving features to sell later.
Flunk - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
They've been working on this for quite a while, since long before "lightning" was released. Standards take a lot longer to get worked out than proprietary ports. The idea that Apple drives every advance in technology is fallacious.JimmaDaRustla - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Yes, and this thing blows the lightning adapter out of the water in terms of power and bandwidth - pretty sure the lightning adapter is slower than their old fat connector because the HDMI adapters have a mini processor in them to decompress video because the adapter couldn't deliver.Anyway, its kind of like Apple Pay - I'm sure people will give them praise for the whole technology, meanwhile Google, payment networks, acquires, EMV, and financial institutes have been working on tokenization for a long time now. Apple just had perfect timing, understood what they had to do with the iPhone and iOS, and used their power to say "1...2...3...JUMP". It is awesome, can't deny that, but to your point, we can't take everything from Apple at face value.
ivat - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
No. Thunderbolt 2, available right now in any Retina Macbook Pro and the Mac Pro is 20 Gbps, twice USB 3.1's 10 Gbps [1]. USB 3.1 won't be in products until 2015 (see article). In 2015, Thunderbolt 3 will come out and will be 40 Gbps [2].You are referring to the Thunderbolt 1 HDMI adapter which down sampled the video because it was bandwidth limited. Thunderbolt 1 was 10 Gbps, just like USB 3.1.
[1] - http://www.anandtech.com/show/7049/intel-thunderbo...
[2] - http://www.extremetech.com/computing/181099-next-g...
willis936 - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Firstly the comparison is between the lighting connected and the USB-C connector and there's no contest. The USB-C wins where it matters by a fair margin.Secondly thunderbolt is an Intel invention, not an Apple one. Apple was an early adopter.
WinterCharm - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link
Actually, Thunderbolt came as a partnership between Intel and Apple. Apple approached them with the technology, and asked Intel to build it so that it wouldn't go the way of FireWire.C@illou - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
Sorry but this thread is about Lightning, which is the last iPhone/iPad connector, and not about Thunderbold, which of course blows out USB 3.1 in term of speed and video signal capabilities. They're talking about a reversible connector, which Thunderbolt is not.(And I don't think Thunderbold / Mini Display Port to HDMI was downsampling anything, at least, not at 1080p)
Laststop311 - Saturday, September 13, 2014 - link
thunderbolt 2 rly didnt add extra bandwidth. thunderbolt 1 has 2 10gbit channels but if ur only using 1 it still runs at 10gbps thunderbolt 2 allows you to bond the channels together to give you 20gbps but if u are using both channels its still 10 gbps.iwod - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Are you confusing USB 3.1 and Type C Connector, which are not the same thing. ( Although they could coexist )JarredWalton - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
My problem with this connector is the same problem I have with micro-USB: the connectors are too fragile! I've had quite a few USB to micro-USB cables go bad on me, where wiggling the connector in my phone (or even touching it) can cause a disconnect to happen. From that standpoint, I think the Lightning connector looks a lot more robust. This is a case where smaller isn't always better -- the big USB connectors rarely gave me any trouble, mini-USB was pretty reliable, but micro-USB has been far more flaky in my experience. Anyone else have that problem?fokka - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
i had problems with the reliability of micro usb connectors too on my phone for some time. but to be honest, my experiences with mini usb haven't been much better.but then i remembered, that i once had problems getting a good connection with my headphones. it turned out that there was a bit of pocket lint accumulated in the hole over time. i took it out with with my needle nose tweezers, which solved the problem back then.
lo and behold, pocket lint was the culprit with the bad usb connection too! it took a couple minutes to ply and scratch and blow it all out, but now my usb cables work like champs again!
you should power down your device when performing this operation though and maybe even take out your battery, if that's possible, otherwise you risk shorting out the contacts to ground.
maybe it's the same thing with your devices?
evilspoons - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Micro-USB cables are fragile on purpose so they don't destroy the connectors on the PCB in your devices, like what happened continuously with Mini-USB. Much easier to replace a $3 cable a couple time than re-solder a USB connector to your phone's mainboard.Jumpman23 - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I feel the lightning connector is perfect in terms of durability and size. There's nothing in the female port itself unlike the microusb female connector so you could jam the male side in harder without worrying about breaking off the pins on the inside.rGiskard - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
I believe the word you're looking for is "thrust," as in "you could thrust the male side in harder and harder without worrying...":P
C@illou - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
I think USB Type C connector should have less disconnection issues (not that I ever had any). They have pins on both sides, this redundancy should make them more reliable (i.e. when moving the connector, there are less chance of disconnecting both opposed pins than disconnecting a unique pin).wrkingclass_hero - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
Yes! Micro usb is terrible! Type C looks bad too, I wish they had stuck with the mini usb form factor. Please make an article addressing these issues.TrackSmart - Saturday, September 13, 2014 - link
In response to Jarred: Every microUSB car charger I've ever owned has failed at the connector after some amount of use. And it was definitely NOT an issue with dirt/lint/corrosion. I now buy car chargers that have removable cables for *when* (not if) they start having connectivity problems. The car charger is a worst-case scenario for a microUSB cable. It is often being tugged on and the phone is physically resting on the cable connection when sitting in someone's cupholder.SUMMARY: The male ends of MicroUSB cables are definitely NOT robust. But I've never had problems with the internal socket on a phone or other gadget. I hope both sides of the connection are more robust this time around.
flatrock - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
My daughter went through quite a few lightning cables for her iPhone 5. She has learned to treat the cables a bit more delicately and hasn't had one go bad for a while. I also quit buying cables directly from Apple, since Apple's appear to be cheaply made and not particularly durable.I've had a number of micro-usb cables go bad, as well, but mostly because abuse like getting stepped on on the car floor and having the connector bent, which no small cable can survive.
Samuel Lord - Thursday, September 18, 2014 - link
Yes, micro-USB is a nightmare for anyone using it over a few hundred cycles (um, smartphones). It was claimed to be better than Mini USB but is simply garbage. Actually *any* nonlocking connector for high speed data is garbage: remember how DP was advertised as locking when it came out? Lies, lies...sigh. Actually HDMI is the *very* worst, if you blink it falls out. Thunderbolt is made with tighter specs, but they *all* fail the lock test unless you buy a $$$ locking connector cable.ytg137 - Monday, December 8, 2014 - link
I've had a number of micro-USB chargers or connectors fail. I've never been sure whether someone stepped on the tip, or why they stopped working.And you're right... I've never had a failure with the previous types of chargers/connectors. However, my husband & son in law bought the Samsung Note 3 last fall. The chargers have USB 3.0 Micro B connectors. Both of their chargers failed in less than a year. I don't know if this is a reflection on Samsung's manufacturing, or on the durability of this type of wire.
van2 - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
Yes! Still waiting for a small connector as reliable as magsafe. We have seen many of the micro-usb jacks and cables quickly become broke or worse yet, intermittent, because they are just not sturdy enough. Worst case scenario is the new Macbook announced in March 2015 which has no mag-safe power connector, but just one (count'em one!) type-C connector which is the only way to charge the battery. The connector spec allows for upto 100 watts of power, which means a fairly thick cable going to a fragile connector. As soon as the receptacle on this macbook is broken/worn-out/intermittent, the macbook just became an expensive brick. I wish those apple engineers who supposedly were involved in the design of this connector took "Strain-relief 101" section of mechanical engineering. You never want the weight or tension of a cable conveyed to a connector, but that is the problem with most of these smaller connectors. This can be alleviated if the jack can be recessed so the cable can snap into a cable holder that takes all the weight/force of the cable, conveying none of it to the jack/receptacle. I also actually like the plug on the current iPhone cable, which looks like the edge-connector of a small circuit board having just gold-plated traces, no mechanical gold plated fingers. Probably more expensive, but all the mechanical bugs have been worked out of edge-connectors for decades now (or else your ram would not work!). We'll have to see how reliable this type-c connector is, but my first impressions was same as original poster: looks like it would be fragile and very prone to failure. Especially with a hefty power-supply cable.
On another forum someone commented: "Sad to see MagSafe go, but Apple brining their 18 engineers to the USB consorcium to come up with reversible USB-C connector as common standard is highly appreciated."
Apple's white power-bricks with mag-safe have seen several generations of improvement to help reduce problems such as torn insulation, internal wires breaking, etc. Mostly they have stiffened the cable several times so as to prevent it from being bent to a small radius. The stiffened cable does not cause issues with the magsafe connector. But such a stiff cable on the C connector would be a big mechanical strain on such a small receptacle that at least appears to be fragile. If you are going to provide 100 watts thru a connector system, one of the top priorities would be for it to be mechanically sturdy.
Filiprino - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Apple released Lightning in September 2012. Do you think USB 3.1 wasn't in the works before that?A new spec with double speed and 20x power delivery isn't developed in 2 years. If that was the case, USB 3.1 wouldn't be only a 10 Gbps interface, but 20 Gbps in line with Thunderbolt 2 (Intel's propietary proposal).
CaedenV - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Last I checked Lightning is an Intel thing, and it uses up precious PCIe lanes, uses expensive active cables, and has an expensive header system. This makes it impractical to use on most bottom-feeder PCs, and as there are not many external devices that use the standard the high-end market is largely ignoring it, or only allowing it as an expansion card (or riser card as it is all hosted on the CPU in the first place).In a mac where you pretty much never use expansion cards it makes lightning cables extremely useful as it is the only way to get high end peripherals for your system... but in the PC world you simply have other cheaper options at hand.
Anywho, just saying it is not an apple thing.
Ian Cutress - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
You're confusing Lightning with Thunderbolt.soccerballtux - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
that would be so funny if it weren't so truesoccerballtux - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
"So what _is_ a thunderbolt?""well, it's _like_ lighting, but it's a bolt you see..."
Samus - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
It's easy for Apple to rush development for interfaces like Thunderbolt (which is an Intel-developed technology) because Apple doesn't need to worry about anything other than Apple products.USB needs to be compatible with multiple OS's, hardware, software, OEM's, developers, manufacturers, and so on. It's much easier to develop an interface for a few products (iPhone/iPad lightning, iMac/Macbook/Mac Pro thunderbolt) than thousands of products, all of which need to go through validation on various different schedules.
Apple is like a Mercedes S class which often gets the cool gizmo's first (first with airbags, ABS, stability control, radar cruise control, rain sensing wipers, multi-stage seat belt pretensioners, electronic braking distribution, brake assist, lane guidance, and so on.
The problem with being first is you are the most expensive, and your product isn't as refined as it later will be, usually by somebody else.
sl149q - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
USB definitely needs to be compatible with multiple OS's etc etc etc.But there is no change to the USB spec, just to the connector spec. This will not need any changes to USB drivers.. It is just a different plug and jack and cable.
boraski - Saturday, September 13, 2014 - link
Good thoughts. Another thing to consider is that Apple has their own goals for their devices and can control their own destiny. They were probably aware of this USB spec impending but not willing to wait the 2-3 years for industry ratification and ramp-up of it. They had to retire the 30 pin connector to save space in their newer devices and lightning is an improvement from the standpoint of users as well.Krysto - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Hopefully EU will force Apple to adopt USB Type C in its iOS devices, too.Impulses - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Ha! When pigs fly... They'll just release some adapter like when they "agreed" to support 2.0.Penti - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Actually the same suppliers and designers (they own the tech not Apple) is involved with both Lightning and USB 3.1 Type-C. Standardization do take some extra time.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I don't think it is important. Regardless, the Lightning connection/port is defective. Clearly not ALL of them go, but a large enough number that there are threads all over the place with people with dead Lightning connector devices (and cables).I've given up on Apple until they switch to USB, after having my FOURTH Lightning device fail on me (not counting cables). iPhone 5s which lasted me 10 months (and probably only 10 months because I babied it so much.
kezeka - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I genuinely have had ZERO problems with lightning connectors or any of the lightning devices that I own. I know many people with the exact same experience. Two friends have had problems with their power buttons failing but apple swooped in with a recall on those.I can help but think you are overdramatizing here or that you have an incredibly rough personal usage model. Either way, if you are running into that many failures I find it hard to believe that it is the device and not the user. I predict poor success with any mobile device - android or apple or Microsoft based - in your future.
samsonjs - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
It's common for the port to get blocked up with lint. If your phone doesn't charge clean out the port and give it another shot.fteoath64 - Saturday, September 13, 2014 - link
What are ought to be appalled with is why Apple did not make a magsafe type connector instead of a plug!!!. (Obvious isn't it) Anything that had protruding parts and a non-flexible head-connect will be subjected to breakage. Apple knows the number of cable complains and their poor quality Lightning cables. Had they made a smaller magsafe connector (reversible) then those breakages will just go-away and cables lasts a lot longer like the older 30-pin connectors working well 6 years later!!!.The standard Lightning cable hardly last a year!. Magsafe was a great concept being able to break away on accidental trips on the cables or device!.
Conficio - Saturday, September 13, 2014 - link
Two reasons:* MagSafe connectors are too big to fit mobile devices (they need a ring of magnets)
* MagSafe connectors are not fail safe either, I had one broken by my 3 yr old and you can read happily on the net how many people try to replace their mag safe cables on their chargers.
flatrock - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
Apple has managed to come up with a lot of things that probably should have been obvious, but were overlooked by the rest of the industry. It has usually been related to putting better user interfaces on products that had a lot of room for improvement in that area. A reversible connector is kind of along the same lines. It does the same thing as what was on other devices, but made using it a bit easier.xilience - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Could you post a comparison of the USB type C vs Lightning specs and featureset?ascend - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
A minor but important typo: "Peak throughput goes from 10 Gbps from 5 Gbps"Now I'm not sure which side meant to say "to".
JoshHo - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Fixed.nathanddrews - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
"Peak throughput goes from 10 Gbps from 5 Gbps, which translates to a peak of 1.25 GB/sec."I think you meant "goes to 10Gbps from 5Gbps" or "goes from 5Gbps to 10Gbps".
Very cool to see it taking shape.
silverblue - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I'd love to see 1.25GB/s out of a USB cable, but I'd still be happy if we got 800MB to 1GB/s.inighthawki - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I had to double take and read that about 3 times before it clicked for me. It says it's an improvement that totals 1.25GB/s, which is equivalent to saying "to 10 from 5" or "from 5 to 10"inighthawki - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Sorry replied to the wrong post, this is meant to be in reply to ascend's post above.Pissedoffyouth - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I use a USB3 hub which has a built in gigabit Ethernet port, which works great with my single port on the T100.I get pretty close to gigabit even with transferring but looking forward to next hybrids similar which have USB3.1 ports. A gigabit for Ethernet and 3 gigabits each for the other ports.
prasun - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
What transfer size was used in the test that got 800MBps?JoshHo - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
100MBPICman - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I wonder how they get 100 watts from this connector (20 A at 5 V)? They must use several ground and power pins. It doesn't look like the PCB above would handle 100 watts.SirPerro - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
The spec supports that.Obviously the hardware must be ready to receive that and not get fried in the process.
(I guess it goes through some previous negotiation between both devices)
seibert - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
As part of the power negotiation, the devices can decide raise the voltage on the power rails to 12V or 20V. In both cases, the current limit is 5Aseibert - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
12V is the voltage used now by "high power" USB ports to charge devices like tablets.Zotamedu - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
They wont deliver 100 W at 5 V. USB 3.1 added 12 V and 20 V on top of the standard 5 V. Both new voltages have a limit of 5 A. So ju can draw 60 W at 12 V or 100 W at 20 V. The device needs to request the higher voltages so 5 V will continue to be the standard.hyasinth - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Hopefully that means we might start seeing Laptops and maybe even HTPCs being charged off USB!azazel1024 - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
It isn't at 5V. The 100w is at 24v.IIRC, the USB power delivery spec will be up to 10W using 5V (IE 2A), then up to 20W using 10V (IE 2A again) and up to 100W using 24V (IE 4A). No way could you make a realistic cable and connector to handle 20A, so you've gotta increase the voltage.
It auto negotiates the voltage and ameperage when connecting.
azazel1024 - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Bah, beatten to it and also posted incorrect numbers. 20V@5A is the max.PICman - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Thanks to azazel1024 and others - this makes sense.Marquis - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
It should be noted that while USB Type-C connectors may not be quite as small as MicroUSB 2.0, they're substantially smaller than any of the prior USB 3.0 connectors.SleepyFE - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I think miniUSB 3.0 is a bit smaller, but not usefully so.mkozakewich - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
It depends what 'smaller' means. I took it to mean it'll be a bit thicker. Obviously a wide-but-thin connector would be ideal on phones that need to be ultra-thin. Honestly, though, I think I'd appreciate the increased thickness for something like this.YaBaBom - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Typo: "Peak throughput goes from 10 Gbps from 5 Gbps," --the first 'from' should be 'to'JoshHo - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Fixed.YaBaBom - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I also wonder about durability of a connector carrying 10Mbps and 100 wattskyuu - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Why would the speed of the connection or some extra voltage affect the durability of the connector?Gigaplex - Saturday, September 13, 2014 - link
You need high quality connections for high bandwidth signaling like this. If there's a slightly poor connection it could kill the 10Gbit signaling but the same poor connection might work just fine for legacy 480Mbit.Friendly0Fire - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
"Finally, USB Type-C extensions mean that it's possible to do all kinds of interesting applications over USB ports, such as sending audio and video data. It's even possible for a USB Type C port to send PCI-E data through the connection for use cases such as a two in one convertible tablet."Is it bad if my first thought was that maybe, just maybe, this'd make external GPUs viable? Perhaps a single port wouldn't be enough, but if you can use two in parallel you could theoretically have both power and data go through USB purely. That'd be rather neat.
SleepyFE - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
The PCIe v2 x16 (standard desktop GPU) has 64 Gbps throughput, so we're a bit off. On the other hand, the SLI and Crossfire sometimes use only half that throughput (PCIe v2 x8) for the second GPU. So three or four connectors would work. Though i would only use them for data and put a standard PSU in the case that would house the GPU. That way you keep the price down and you can do some serious gaming on any laptop.DanNeely - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Probably not for most gaming. Bandwidth is getting there; but USB doesn't have the QoS (latency and consistency) to avoid a bit of either latency or occasional lag bursts. For non-gaming use where 50-100ms for buffering isn't a major problem USB3 should be golden.SleepyFE - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Yeah, latency might be a problem. We won't know until someone tries.Gigaplex - Saturday, September 13, 2014 - link
Thunderbolt GPUs have been attempted but haven't come to market in any meaningful sense. If they can't operate properly on Thunderbolt, then PCI-e over USB isn't likely to help.londedoganet - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
"It's even possible for a USB Type C port to send PCI-E data through the connection for use cases such as a two in one convertible tablet."Bye, Thunderbolt, it was nice knowing you. With this (USB3.1 + PCIe) and Dockport (DisplayPort + USB3.0) taking away both of its selling points (DisplayPort + PCIe) while adding more, I don't think that Intel can continue to justify its existence. Perhaps now we'll see more external GPU docks for laptops (PCIe over USB Type C connectors).
dgingeri - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Don't worry, they have Apple. Apple will keep TB alive quite a while longer. They don't just up and switch when better things come along. They wait it out until their old tech becomes burdensome, and then come out with something all new, and usually unrefined, like TB was when it first hit.rpmurray - Saturday, September 13, 2014 - link
Are you honestly peddling this when most PCs still have PS/2 and VGA ports?iwod - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
May be i am not understanding it right. Does it mean PCI-E signals get transferred over without USB overhead? Or is the USB protocol still involved?JCP2014 - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
When do you think we will start seeing phones with this appear? Is next year's GS6, M9, G4, etc too early? I know it says 2015 in the article, but when do you think it will become the standard for flagship phones?edwpang - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Please make the new connector more durable. I have a lot of micro-usb connectors. Some was not reliable in the beginning. Some become less reliable over time. Now only 2-3 are actually working reliably, others are just not connecting or disconnecting all the time.swimtech - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
Agreed, I've been focused on hardware support for a university for 19 years now, and both the smaller USB form factors have had reliability problems due to mechanical weaknesses. Mini USB connectors fail often because the female connector is simply surface mounted to the internal PCB - solder on the legs of the internal connector are all that hold the ones I've seen in place. The male connector looks ok, hopefully the female jack is much more robust - especially since it'll be carrying much higher wattage in certain scenarios - arcing, depending on the pin configuration, will/should be a strong concern for those engineering the jack.kezeka - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
My chief concern with the type C connector is the actual design itself. Is there going to be a central pin in the female port that the male port fits around? That seems like a massive weak point for this connector if so. I guess if it is deep enough within the female port that you are forced to be in the correct angle by the time you reach it, then it will probably be resilient enough to stand up to day to days stress. That said, is there a reason not to design it like a lightning style connector where the male plug first and fills the female port completely without any weak points in the connection?I honestly don't know, which is why I am asking.
DanNeely - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Look at the 3rd picture in the article; it's still got a tongue on the device end.DanNeely - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
...4th...R3MF - Wednesday, September 17, 2014 - link
"That said, is there a reason not to design it like a lightning style connector where the male plug first and fills the female port completely without any weak points in the connection?"Oxidation of the exposed terminals.
Fergy - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
Will this replace all usb connectors? Will we get motherboards with usb-c? Hubs? Keyboard, mouse and usbstick with usb-c? I hope so because those ports are irritating.fluxtatic - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
Eventually, yes. But it'll come to the high-end first - Asus' ROG boards, AsRock's Extreme series, etc. Last I checked, prebuilt mass-market PCs still don't commonly have USB3.metayoshi - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
I can't speak for pre-built desktops, but to my knowledge, most mainstream laptops have been coming out with at least one USB 3.0 port since the Ivy Bridge days.DanNeely - Saturday, September 13, 2014 - link
At this point it's worked its way down to bottom end laptops. I looked on Newegg and found a $199 Chrome Book and $239 windows laptop; both with at USB3 on one side.isa - Friday, September 12, 2014 - link
Joshua, thanks for the review. It would be great if you could consider a follow-up review or article or addendum to this article discussing how stress and connection failures of previous microUSB connector specs have been solved or not with 3.1-C. More specifically, in previous USB connector implementations, most notoriously in microUSB, stresses in the connector were directly transferred to the solder joints in the microUSB connections on the PCB board. So if one wiggled the microUSB insert in any way, or failed to create an ad-hoc stress relief method for any microUSB cable inserted into a device (tape, cardboard, etc), then the stress of the connection would be directly transferred to the PSB solder joints and eventually fail.Has this issue been robustly solved with USB 3.1 C?
LordConrad - Saturday, September 13, 2014 - link
Maybe I'm smarter than the average person, but I don't understand why a reversible connector is such a big deal. I frequently plug in my android phone or tablet to charge in the dark and never have any issues. Do people seriously have problems with this??Fergy - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
So how do you do it without seeing anything? Do you feel with your fingers to find the port and the orientation? Do you then feel the connector and the orientation? Compare that to doing the same with a mini-jack.If you think it has anything to do with intelligence you are pretty dumb.
beggerking@yahoo.com - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link
just try pluging it in.. if it doesn't work, turn it around and plug it in again... pretty easy..besides, with qi charging becoming more wide spread, there is less need for plugging in.
tuxRoller - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link
Was UAS being used?AndreaColognese - Thursday, September 18, 2014 - link
Dear Josua, I read and enjoyed your post. Thanks for sharing. I took the freedom to reuse the pictures with credits and link at your post. Hope this is not a problem.http://cologneseandrea.wordpress.com/2014/09/18/wi...