• u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because it was available for longer?
          It takes a while to implement something. And it also took a while to basically standardize micro USB or mini USB as well. Remember when basically every phone manufacturer had their own connector? USB-C would for a while just break the norm again.

          • someguy3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Really? I’m asking why they didn’t design and use a reversible C style in 2007 instead of the micro USB. Afaik a reversible style is not dependent on tech development from 2007-2014,

            • kn33@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Price, I imagine. Gotta make it cheap enough to get buy in. They were still competing with FireWire at that point.

        • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Because its not just the connector, its the electronics. Usb c requires a chip to negotiate who is the host and whos the device. Usb-C thats completely ambiguous. But micro-B is always assumed is the device. But with power delivery becoming mainstream after micro B was drafted, the electronics can be all rolled into a singlw chip and finnally, reversible usb was cheap. To put in every device imaginable.

          • someguy3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Hmm so the current C can be host or device, but really I’m not focused on that aspect. I’m focused on the reversible flip it over kind of thing - like USB A you flip over because you never get it right. You could have made a USB C style that always assumed is device.

            • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              I mean they could. But it would only solve one side. I dont think the original drafters envision using usb as a charging platform but a data transfer between thousands of different devices and host devices. I dont think they intended for most portable devices to have one side basically permanently fixed.

              For exampe for each mini and micro type B connected theres a mini and micro type A connector. But ive never seen one in the wild, but its suggestion the intention for the usb drafters.

              • someguy3@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing and I don’t know where the confusion is.

                Like when MicroUSB came out, I think charging was pretty standard. The cable can be a normal USB A to USB-something-that-is-reversible-like-USB-C-style, instead of the the USB micro.

                • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Like when MicroUSB came out, I think charging was pretty standard.

                  not really, in 2007, USB wasn’t even the main way to charge phones. most manufactures were using their proprietary connectors. I recall Nokia was using their barrel plug well until they sold to MS.

                  • someguy3@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 months ago

                    I don’t mean micro was the standard way to charge, I mean that charging things was common. People wanted to charge things in 2007. And micro could be used to charge. Charging was a feature of micro.

                    We’re really not talking the same language, I don’t know where the confusion is, so I think I’m gonna bow out.

      • DJDarren@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I have two relatively new microphones that have mini USB, and honestly, I think it’s against the Geneva convention.

        • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          MiniUSB is much more robust than microUSB. Those connectors would fail pretty quick while I have never even heard of miniUSB breaking. Fuck microUSB.

          • fallingcats@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Mini USB cables basically falls out every port I have. Which makes sense, those things don’t even have the tiny retaining clips that micro does.