USB-C to USB-C cables have the same connector on both ends, the plug if you will. Devices have the mating socket (call it the receptacle). There are no cables with a USB-C plug on one end and a USB-C receptacle on the other – USB extension cables are not allowed by the standard.

Oh that's interesting, so I guess none of these are allowed then:
Amazon.com : usb-c to usb-c cable extension

 

Oh that's interesting, so I guess none of these are allowed then:
Amazon.com : usb-c to usb-c cable extension

Not by the USB standard. It's my understanding that they can cause problems.

I'm just stating FACTS.

 

Not by the USB standard. It's my understanding that they can cause problems.

I'm just stating FACTS.

Oh ok that's cool.

What about USB C active extensions?

 

For reference:

​

 

USB-C to USB-C cables have the same connector on both ends, the plug if you will. Devices have the mating socket (call it the receptacle). There are no cables with a USB-C plug on one end and a USB-C receptacle on the other – USB extension cables are not allowed by the standard.

Oh that's interesting, so I guess none of these are allowed then:
Amazon.com : usb-c to usb-c cable extension

Cables and adapters with C female port on one end, is not allowed by the words in the standard, however, I bought C-female to A-male adapter for a laptop external video issue I was having.

 

Back to the problem EU is trying to solve.
I just don't see how the mandate is helping to solve e-waste problem.

I do however recognize other things that we all use that appears to be very helpful. I just started to use laundry detergent sheets instead of big jug liquid. The auto-dispenser on my GE washer is ok, but I wanted to try the sheets. 64 small loads from a tiny cardboard box vs big plastic jug. Knocking out plastics from the packaging stream is very helpful from all angles. EU should mandate that all laundry detergent must be soap sheets packaged in cardboard packaging. Add onto that, soap sheets is relatively new technology, so I assume it will only get better. However, it's not clear to me if making soap sheets is less impact on environment vs making liquid soap and lots of plastic jugs to hold that liquid.

C port today, D port tomorrow. 10tons of throw-away crud sold today, 10tons of throw-away crud in trash tomorrow.

 

Back to the problem EU is trying to solve.
I just don't see how the mandate is helping to solve e-waste problem.

I do however recognize other things that we all use that appears to be very helpful. I just started to use laundry detergent sheets instead of big jug liquid. The auto-dispenser on my GE washer is ok, but I wanted to try the sheets. 64 small loads from a tiny cardboard box vs big plastic jug. Knocking out plastics from the packaging stream is very helpful from all angles. EU should mandate that all laundry detergent must be soap sheets packaged in cardboard packaging. Add onto that, soap sheets is relatively new technology, so I assume it will only get better. However, it's not clear to me if making soap sheets is less impact on environment vs making liquid soap and lots of plastic jugs to hold that liquid.

C port today, D port tomorrow. 10tons of throw-away crud sold today, 10tons of throw-away crud in trash tomorrow.

I believe you are still oversimplifying. It's not "tomorrow" it could be 10 years from now.

 

I believe you are still oversimplifying. It's not "tomorrow" it could be 10 years from now.

That's a weak argument.
And if were able to keep all my A-micro or A-C or C-Lightning cables along with my A+C or A chargers, then it would perhaps be 20yrs from now before I trash them.

I look at how the request (mandate) solves the stated e-waste problem. I don't see how it does. I can see how laundry soap sheets that come in a small cardboard box helps remove waste plastic from the packaging stream which then removes that plastic from the waste stream. Plastics are being removed but you get the same product. With the EU C mandate you are not removing plastics or metals from the waste stream, you only changed what it looks like, 10tons of cables & chargers sold, 10tons of cables and chargers (plastics, metals, chemicals) go into the waste stream. Those are the facts.

 

That's a weak argument.
And if were able to keep all my A-micro or A-C or C-Lightning cables along with my A+C or A chargers, then it would perhaps be 20yrs from now before I trash them.

I look at how the request (mandate) solves the stated e-waste problem. I don't see how it does. I can see how laundry soap sheets that come in a small cardboard box helps remove waste plastic from the packaging stream which then removes that plastic from the waste stream. Plastics are being removed but you get the same product. With the EU C mandate you are not removing plastics or metals from the waste stream, you only changed what it looks like, 10tons of cables & chargers sold, 10tons of cables and chargers (plastics, metals, chemicals) go into the waste stream. Those are the facts.

Well bottom line is you don't really have to worry about it that much because you are not involved in creating the standard or enforcing it. You are spending a lot of time arguing these points but you still don't know for sure, you are still guessing just like the rest of us. For me, I don't mind waiting, and as I said over and over, it's not about anything but the connector on the phone.
The connector on the phone must be USB C (the smaller more common one). That at least means we can eventually know that the phones will always need that kind of connector instead of the various other kinds. It's not too likely to change within maybe 10 years unless we see a new battery type that can take more power. But it's hard to believe that the new batteries in newer future phones will take more than 240 watts unless we see a REALLY big change in batteries. It's still a guess though.

 

The connector on the phone must be USB C (the smaller more common one).

Not to be pedantic (but it fits right in in this somewhat pointless thread), but there is only one USB-C connector as has already been discussed. A device, be it charger or a device using power, has a USB-C receptacle. A cable has a USB-C plug on one or both ends. A cable with a USB-C receptacle is not allowed by the standard. Yes, "extention cables" do exist, but the standard doesn't allow them and their use may not be successful.

One thing I've found to be true when searching forums for information – when you see a thread with many pages (10 in this case), you haven't found a treasure trove of information. There may be tidbits of valuable information contained there in, but it won't be worth the trouble of shifting through the bloviation to find it.

 

This has probably been mentioned previously in the thread -- but I'm not going to wade through 190 posts to see.

The problem I have with this kind of mandate is it freezes a technology that is still naturally evolving. What if the U.K. know-what's-best-for-everyone government types had decided to solve this problem a couple decades ago by mandating that all devices had to use a USB-B jack instead of letting companies choose which type they wanted? USB-C is not the end-all-be-all protocol or connector. Newer and better solutions will continue to evolve and the U.K. is locking themselves out of benefiting from them.

 

This has probably been mentioned previously in the thread -- but I'm not going to wade through 190 posts to see.

The problem I have with this kind of mandate is it freezes a technology that is still naturally evolving. What if the U.K. know-what's-best-for-everyone government types had decided to solve this problem a couple decades ago by mandating that all devices had to use a USB-B jack instead of letting companies choose which type they wanted? USB-C is not the end-all-be-all protocol or connector. Newer and better solutions will continue to evolve and the U.K. is locking themselves out of benefiting from them.

Actually, it's the EU that has made it mandatory and the UK is thinking about it (having a consultation).
There's been a new version of USB every three or four years since it was invented: why should that trend stop now?

 

Well bottom line is you don't really have to worry about it that much because you are not involved in creating the standard or enforcing it. You are spending a lot of time arguing these points but you still don't know for sure, you are still guessing just like the EU and rest of us.

I added the bold part for clarity.
That was my point, what data or studies did EU conduct or get to determine they had a fix? Are there any?

 

Actually, it's the EU that has made it mandatory and the UK is thinking about it (having a consultation).
There's been a new version of USB every three or four years since it was invented: why should that trend stop now?

It would probably be better to select a target timeframe, say every 5 or 10yrs, and then a govt creates an incentive of some sort that asks for innovation to be advanced (with some reasonable goals), something on the order of USB-A to USB-C. This way you can innovate technology with some goals, and along the way innovators can capture incentives. A win-win framework for all people.

 

Hello,

From howtogeek:

The latest entries, USB 4.0, Thunderbolt 3, and Thunderbolt 4, are where you'll find the highest data transfer speeds: a maximum capable throughput of 40 Gbps. Thunderbolt is another transfer speed standard used in some USB-C cables—all Thunderbolt 3 and 4 cables are USB-C, but not all USB-C cables are Thunderbolt. So if Thunderbolt is what you're after, you'll need to make sure that's part of the cable you're buying.

https://www.howtogeek.com/53587/usb-explained-all-the-different-types-and-what-theyre-used-for/

Unfortunately the page has a lot of adds.
Use an adblocker or brave browser.

Bertus

 

It would probably be better to select a target timeframe, say every 5 or 10yrs, and then a govt creates an incentive of some sort that asks for innovation to be advanced (with some reasonable goals), something on the order of USB-A to USB-C. This way you can innovate technology with some goals, and along the way innovators can capture incentives. A win-win framework for all people.

The problem is that this assumes that the govt has some kind of crystal ball to know where technology can or should go. If that were the case, then command economies would have a much better track record than they do.

 

Actually, it's the EU that has made it mandatory and the UK is thinking about it (having a consultation).
There's been a new version of USB every three or four years since it was invented: why should that trend stop now?

Because the EU is trying to mandate that it stop.

 

The problem is that this assumes that the govt has some kind of crystal ball to know where technology can or should go. If that were the case, then command economies would have a much better track record than they do.

Govt should not manipulate the technology. The markets are free to compete. The govt is to create only the incentive and stated goals.

Like this:

"We are wanting 5% faster comms speed and attain 0.5% more power efficiency to supersede existing USB v4.0 PD3.1 specs by year 2030, patent holder will receive $1mil innovative bonus from XYZ govt".

What the port becomes does not matter, maybe a "USB-D" that has extra 4pins over USB-C, yet still backwards compatible so that the new D port can attain comms and power via all of the older existing C stuff, but at the older C spec rates.

Allow innovators to invent and bring stuff to the market.

 

Not to be pedantic (but it fits right in in this somewhat pointless thread), but there is only one USB-C connector as has already been discussed. A device, be it charger or a device using power, has a USB-C receptacle. A cable has a USB-C plug on one or both ends. A cable with a USB-C receptacle is not allowed by the standard. Yes, "extention cables" do exist, but the standard doesn't allow them and their use may not be successful.

One thing I've found to be true when searching forums for information – when you see a thread with many pages (10 in this case), you haven't found a treasure trove of information. There may be tidbits of valuable information contained there in, but it won't be worth the trouble of shifting through the bloviation to find it.

Hello there,

Well, you are right about the form factor, they must have changed something since the very beginning, but there are different USB C connectors with respect to their ratings. Some are rated for less current than others, and probably for less voltage than others too.
The form factor is the same, except for the number of pins. Some will have lower pin count than others.

Yes, using a USB C extension cable may not be successful, but then that also means that it may be successful, especially at lower data rates and lower current levels. It is interesting to know that the standard does not provide for that, which is kind of dumb because they are essentially just trying to reduce their own workload for specifying them. If they work sometimes, then there are limits that should be examined and noted. They just got lazy

 

Sigh