Electronics manufactures must from Saturday fit all devices sold in the EU with USB-C charger ports in a bid by the 27-nation bloc to reduce waste and cut costs for consumers, who will no longer have…
What I don’t understand is what was wrong with mini-USB.
Too thick? Just why do people want a portable computer to be thinner that their wallet, or their notebook, or their damned pen, or that Snickers bar in their pocket which nobody made thinner. Who the hell told them that “miniaturization being the future of tech” has anything to do with the box inside which that tech is mounted being just a bit thinner? I mean, were it thin enough to put computers into printed magazine pages, maybe (I think I’ve read that someone did this, with a computer kinda as powerful as ZX Spectrum). Why do they specifically need it? Not to appear “modern”, but really?
The question is, because for me personally mini-USB was very convenient. It held well, was easy enough to stick the right way (and not ruin it trying to stick it the wrong way).
Now, I guess USB-C is fine if it can do the same and go both ways. I actually like it, except RPi 4 is the only device I have needing it.
It’s just … how can one try so many connector types for one group of standards?..
Mini-USB sucked, big time. Not so bad as micro, but yea it was bad.
The main advantage of C over all previous versions is that it’s reversible, you can’t plug it in wrong. The shape is also… “flat”?, so it’s easier to fit into the socket, mini had that wavy like thing going on.
My data source is my small kid: he’s broken 3 (and counting…) usb-mini micro connectors by tugging the charging PS4 controllers, and he has to ask me to connect the cable to charge them, he’s unable to do it himself yet. With his tablet, 0 usb-c connectors broken and he can plug it in himself.
What I don’t understand is what was wrong with mini-USB.
Too thick? Just why do people want a portable computer to be thinner that their wallet, or their notebook, or their damned pen, or that Snickers bar in their pocket which nobody made thinner. Who the hell told them that “miniaturization being the future of tech” has anything to do with the box inside which that tech is mounted being just a bit thinner? I mean, were it thin enough to put computers into printed magazine pages, maybe (I think I’ve read that someone did this, with a computer kinda as powerful as ZX Spectrum). Why do they specifically need it? Not to appear “modern”, but really?
The question is, because for me personally mini-USB was very convenient. It held well, was easy enough to stick the right way (and not ruin it trying to stick it the wrong way).
Now, I guess USB-C is fine if it can do the same and go both ways. I actually like it, except RPi 4 is the only device I have needing it.
It’s just … how can one try so many connector types for one group of standards?..
Mini-USB sucked, big time. Not so bad as micro, but yea it was bad.
The main advantage of C over all previous versions is that it’s reversible, you can’t plug it in wrong. The shape is also… “flat”?, so it’s easier to fit into the socket, mini had that wavy like thing going on.
My data source is my small kid: he’s broken 3 (and counting…) usb-
minimicro connectors by tugging the charging PS4 controllers, and he has to ask me to connect the cable to charge them, he’s unable to do it himself yet. With his tablet, 0 usb-c connectors broken and he can plug it in himself.I think you guys are taking about micro USB. PS4 controllers have micro, PS3 controllers had mini USB.
They were both equally terrible the only improvement micro had over mini was it was slightly smaller.