Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Why doesn't the USB consortium standardize (and, ideally, enforce) labeling of ports and cables by capabilities? Kind of like washing instructions labels on clothes, only printed on the cable.

The ports on a laptop wouldn't have to be physically labeled if the OS could display a list of their capabilities in a user-friendly manner. Or, perhaps, they should have the most important label (e.g. thunderbolt or not). Something the committee would decide.



Well the USB IF does have standard naming and labels for the protocols. The issue is that USB Type-C is a cable/port standard, not a protocol standard. Makers ought to label the USB Type-C port with the highest USB speed it can handle ("SuperSpeed" or "SuperSpeed+" typically) but they don't. And Apple left the Thunderbolt icon off the ports on the new MacBook Pro! So buyers have no immediate way to know if a MacBook supports USB 3.1 gen 1, 3.1 gen 2, or TB3. (hint: gen1)


How would a consortium force you to print stuff on the cables you produce/sell?


By making it one of the conditions for licensing the specification and permission to use the USB trademark to you.


Well it worked for the color of the ports up until USB3.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: