• S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    38·
    2 months ago

    The story of the usb has it wild things. They knew that it had the problem of picking a wrong side but they had to make it cheap cause they feared manufacturers wouldn’t use it. In fact was so cheap apple decided it to give it a go first. That cheap shit had to walk first so USB C can fly.

          • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
            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
              1·
              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.worldEnglish
                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
            4·
            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
              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
                0·
                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
                  1·
                  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.

        • DJDarren@thelemmy.clubEnglish
          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
            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
              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.

  • Redroof!9@lemmy.world
    3·
    2 months ago

    HELP I- 😭 I DECIDED TO WEAR MY KALPAK HAT TO THE TREATY SIGNING AND THE GREEKS YELLED “HOLY WARRIOR!” AND I INTRODUCED MYSELF (I have a Mustafa Kemal Atatürk Voice) AND WE REUNIFIED TURKEY