Bye-Bye Lightning Connector, Hello USB-C?

[Anderton]

The latest Focusrite 2i2 has USB-C. Newer Android phones have USB-C. Various weird products from China that need power have USB-C connectors that plug into USB adapters. Thunderbolt uses USB-C, USB 4 uses USB-C. Apple uses USB-C on some of its iPads.

 

Now the European commission is pushing for all smart phones and tablets to have USB-C connectors. Their reasoning is that this will cut down on waste (it will), make consumers less frustrated (it will), and be more convenient (I agree). And, USB-C can pass signal and power, including powering laptops and such.

 

The outlier is Apple's Lightning connector. I've expressed my feelings about the Lightning connector before - I get that the 30-pin dock connector had long outlived its usefulness, that the Lightning connector was introduced in 2012, and USB-C was announced shortly thereafter (but to be fair, wasn't finalized until 2014). Still, virtually nothing speaks Lightning. I'm surprised Apple didn't jump to USB-C immediately 7 or 8 years ago, and offered a USB-C to Lightning adapter for those with older phones.

 

And I predict that's what will happen with iPhones and Europe - another dongle, not an attempt to "get with the program" and realize that there's value in making life easier for consumers. Granted, there would still be incompatibilities - the adapter for your smartphone wouldn't be able to deliver 70 Watts to your laptop. But then, at least all you would need to do is look for the right adapter, not some weirdass cable. And the average consumer might not understand that USB-C is a connector, not a data protocol, and fail to recognize the difference between a USB-C port that only does USB or one that does Thunderbolt and USB.

 

We'll see what happens, but what do you think? Would you be happier if there was just one connector, and all your adapters were at least mostly compatible? Thoughts?

[KuruPrionz]

I would love a single, sturdy, reliable system for all widgets.

 

It would need re-engineered but I love the power supply cabling for my 2014 Apple laptop, the one with the magnets that will break free without damage.

Since there is no inherent friction or incorrect way to plug that in, theoretically it could last forever. I don't expect small cables to persevere but they might last longer too if they just popped free when stressed.

There should be a way to do it, given the incredible tech that now exists.

 

But, it makes sense. Therefore, it is impossible to implement it. My definition of a corporation is a group of geniuses who are equivalent to one imbecile.

[Marzzz]

Can USB-C be made waterproof?

[RABid]

Apple still clings tightly to the lightening connector because they get paid for every device and cable that a manufactures makes and sells. They own lightening and enjoy the revenue stream. While I really like my M1 Air, the USB-C ports are not what they should be. The new SanDisk Extreme Pro V2 will transfer data at twice the speed that the Mac ports can handle. The USB-C iPads have an even slower port.

 

[video:youtube]

[analogika]

While I applaud the idea, it's worth noting that the initial proposal required standardising on MICRO-USB.

 

The fact that by the time the legislature has been formulated and the proposal formally put together, that piece-of-shit "standard" has already been obsoleted by the USB-C socket throws up the question of whether it's a good idea to legislate technical standards.

 

What happens if, five years from now, somebody comes up with a WAY better connector? We're stuck with USB-C forever.

 

OTOH: everybody will finally be onboard with USB-C, which is the nicest connector I've worked with in the past 35 years.

[spokenward]

OTOH: everybody will finally be onboard with USB-C, which is the nicest connector I've worked with in the past 35 years.

 

Solving the upside whichy-way dilemma (especially when I am crawling, squinting and holding a phone flashlight) is just about enough to earn that most "nicest connector"-ever honor.

 

But just when I think that I have it all figured out I find something else. I found this resource while looking to qualify a cable for a power task.

 

https://learn.adafruit.com/understanding-usb-type-c-cable-types-pitfalls-and-more/cable-types-and-differences

[KuruPrionz]

Apple still clings tightly to the lightening connector because they get paid for every device and cable that a manufactures makes and sells. They own lightening and enjoy the revenue stream. While I really like my M1 Air, the USB-C ports are not what they should be. The new SanDisk Extreme Pro V2 will transfer data at twice the speed that the Mac ports can handle. The USB-C iPads have an even slower port.

 

[video:youtube]

 

 

Hmmm... this article indicates that only a very small number off the shelf computers made by any company can keep up with that SanDisk, let alone the least expensive Mac.

It's fast as hell, progress. Next generation of computers might keep up or they might leave it in the dust, who knows?

 

https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/sandisk-extreme-pro-portable-ssd-v2

 

Does the Mac Mini even have a lightning connection, the ones I looked at didn't.

[Anderton]

OTOH: everybody will finally be onboard with USB-C, which is the nicest connector I've worked with in the past 35 years.

 

Solving the upside whichy-way dilemma (especially when I am crawling, squinting and holding a phone flashlight) is just about enough to earn that most "nicest connector"-ever honor.

 

But just when I think that I have it all figured out I find something else. I found this resource while looking to qualify a cable for a power task.

 

https://learn.adafruit.com/understanding-usb-type-c-cable-types-pitfalls-and-more/cable-types-and-differences

 

Yes, USB-C is a universal connector, not a protocol. There's no way standardizing on a connector will allow for one adapter to rule them all - a cell phone adapter is simply not going to power a laptop. But, it would be cool that all those little things that take up a few watts could all use the same adapter, and a beefy laptop adapter would work with all laptops.

[Anderton]

Can USB-C be made waterproof?

 

Yes, it can. The same patent for Lightning covers USB-C as well.

[Anderton]

While I applaud the idea, it's worth noting that the initial proposal required standardising on MICRO-USB.

 

The fact that by the time the legislature has been formulated and the proposal formally put together, that piece-of-shit "standard" has already been obsoleted by the USB-C socket throws up the question of whether it's a good idea to legislate technical standards.

 

What happens if, five years from now, somebody comes up with a WAY better connector? We're stuck with USB-C forever.

 

Well, this is one of those "there's no good solution, only less bad ones" situations. If something radically better came along, I suppose it would require coming up with a dongle for USB-C until the new standard became established.

 

OTOH: everybody will finally be onboard with USB-C, which is the nicest connector I've worked with in the past 35 years.

 

Agreed. I don't really feel a need for something smaller, and given that it can handle enough watts to power a computer and enough data for Thunderbolt, it will probably take care of us for quite a while.

 

And it would be REALLY nice if the USB people would clean up the terminology! High-speed, SuperSpeed, 3.1 Gen X or whatever...

[Marzzz]

I don't really feel a need for something smaller

However that is an important consideration for hand-held devices, and nanotech in the future. But then again, if everything goes completely wireless (charging, etc.) then I guess it becomes a completely moo point.

 

 

[video:youtube]

[spokenward]

OTOH: everybody will finally be onboard with USB-C, which is the nicest connector I've worked with in the past 35 years.

 

Solving the upside whichy-way dilemma (especially when I am crawling, squinting and holding a phone flashlight) is just about enough to earn that most "nicest connector"-ever honor.

 

But just when I think that I have it all figured out I find something else. I found this resource while looking to qualify a cable for a power task.

 

https://learn.adafruit.com/understanding-usb-type-c-cable-types-pitfalls-and-more/cable-types-and-differences

 

Yes, USB-C is a universal connector, not a protocol. There's no way standardizing on a connector will allow for one adapter to rule them all - a cell phone adapter is simply not going to power a laptop. But, it would be cool that all those little things that take up a few watts could all use the same adapter, and a beefy laptop adapter would work with all laptops.

 

Specifically, my confusion was between 5A and 3A cables. That was a finer point that I missed. That's why I find myself documenting what I bought.

[RABid]

At least there is one positive. I can use the same charger on my computer as my phone. From what I have read you can buy a high watt charger and the device it charges determines the power output.

[Anderton]

At least there is one positive. I can use the same charger on my computer as my phone. From what I have read you can buy a high watt charger and the device it charges determines the power output.

 

Hopefully

[analogika]

At least there is one positive. I can use the same charger on my computer as my phone. From what I have read you can buy a high watt charger and the device it charges determines the power output.

For Apple users, this has been the case since 2016. None of their power supplies have a fixed cable â you just plug in your USB-C power delivery cable, and you're good.

 

I don't carry an iPad or iPhone charger around when I have my laptop along; I just need the USB-C to Lightning cable and and charge directly off the MacBook power supply (or off the MacBook, for that matter).

[Notes_Norton]

I think one universal connector would make the UNIVERSAL serial bus actually universal.

 

And one of the reasons why I shun Apple is because they don't want you to be able to talk to anyone else. I like my Galaxy tabled much better than my iPod air, because if I want to put pictures on my tablet to show my family, a USB flash drive is all I need.

 

I remember when every computer had its own proprietary system. Then IBM came along, followed by the IBM compatibles. That made life a lot easier.

 

To me, having an Apple product is like having a fine automobile, but you can't get fuel at a regular gas station. You can only fill the tank up at airports and if you need it serviced, 95% of the garages won't touch it.

 

If Apple would get with the standards, I'd buy more of their products.

 

But that's just me.

 

Bob

[Marzzz]

If Apple would get with the standards, I'd buy more of their products.

Damn right! And we would still have floppy drives!

[Anderton]

If Apple would get with the standards, I'd buy more of their products.

 

Well, Thunderbolt is standard, USB-C is standard, and 1/8" headphone jacks are...okay, we'll forget those The macOS is based on Linux IIRC, and their use of Core Audio is really no different from Windows using native audio. The difference there is that Apple's version has lower latency, and because it's the only audio driver, all audio programs conform to it. Windows has low-latency drivers that not only aggregate automatically (as opposed to the Mac's needing to set up aggregated interfaces), and have about the same latency as ASIO (I can get 64 samples on my computer). However, few programs support the low-latency drivers, because it's easier and more of a standard to go with ASIO. The lack of standardization has made Windows less expensive and better at backwards compatibility, but at the expense of current compatibility, and a uniform platform for developers.

 

Apple's penchant for exclusivity, though, has resulted in some questionable decisions. They collaborated with Intel on Thunderbolt, and I guess that to the victor goes the spoils. But the exclusivity meant Windows couldn't do anything for a year, and then had to play catch up. Thunderbolt has just now become more of an industry standard, and not a Mac-only thing. Ultimately, though, I believe the exclusivity was short-sighted, because the smaller market gave developers less incentive to create Thunderbolt-compatible peripherals. So for that crucial first year, although the Mac had Thunderbolt, what you could do with it was limited. Even without exclusivity, they still would have had a head start on Windows. And, the exclusivity within Apple itself is puzzling. Why can't you run iOS apps in macOS? Why did Apple perfect touch with phones and tablets, but didn't bring that to computers? But then they do something genius, like let iPad Pros be display sidecars to laptops. I just wish they'd make up their minds whether they want tablets to become laptops. Meanwhile, Microsoft needs to decide whether they want laptops to become tablets.

 

Of course, the only reason we're discussing this at all is because Commodore blew it so badly on the Amiga

[RABid]

...

Of course, the only reason we're discussing this at all is because Commodore blew it so badly on the Amiga

 

I loved the Amiga. What I didn't love is the early Radio Shack computers. They did everything to their own standard. Even their joysticks were wired differently than the standard Atari joysticks.

 

What I really wish Apple would do is put a touch screen on the M1 Air. I don't understand why Apple is so resistant to put a touch screen on their MacBooks.

[KuruPrionz]

...

Of course, the only reason we're discussing this at all is because Commodore blew it so badly on the Amiga

 

I loved the Amiga. What I didn't love is the early Radio Shack computers. They did everything to their own standard. Even their joysticks were wired differently than the standard Atari joysticks.

 

What I really wish Apple would do is put a touch screen on the M1 Air. I don't understand why Apple is so resistant to put a touch screen on their MacBooks.

 

Well, from talking to you on here, we've both worked at corporations. They are incomprehensible, true? Sometimes they will shine, other times they will trip over their own shoelaces and lay their face down in a pool of their own drool, smiling. I am constantly amazed by the ways that a group of genius people (and make no mistake, both Apple AND Microsoft, to say nothing of Nvidia and many others, are run by and packed with genius level humans), can just totally f*ck things up.

.

Why they end up behaving like imbeciles is beyond me.

[Groove On]

...What I really wish Apple would do is put a touch screen on the M1 Air. I don't understand why Apple is so resistant to put a touch screen on their MacBooks.

I don't think they're being resistant; I think they have a bigger long term goal - beyond just screwing a touch screen to a laptop. Just look at the move to Apple Silicon hardware and the tight integration of the MacOS/iOS; they're definitely headed in that direction. I downloaded Safari 15 yesterday for the Mac; it's ridiculously "touch screen" friendly. Hopefully, whatever they offer up, still has a bit of that Steve Jobs magic.

[Notes_Norton]

If Apple would get with the standards, I'd buy more of their products.

Damn right! And we would still have floppy drives!

So you are saying floppy drives are still standard?

 

I still have some in a closet if you want to buy some. I'd have to clean the dust off first.

 

But beware, they are PC formatted (Or IBM as we called them back then). When I started writing styles for Band-in-a-Box I learned that I could trade floppy disks with any platform that BiaB worked on, except Apple. Their format was exclusive. (I could even swap disks and files with an Atari computer)

 

And if I managed to get a compatible BiaB style file onto a Mac formatted disk, the Mac still couldn't read it because their file format was different. Mac files ignored the dot-3 identifier and needed a Mac Header. I paid a yearly fee to be a Mac software developer and get priority tech help, but the techs said that the information to put a Mac header on the files was proprietary, and they can't share that information with me.

 

Fortunately, some hackers published how to do it, and PG Music had already supplied me with what that header information should be.

 

Apple wants to keep you in "Apple Jail" (or as they market it, their ecosystem). They don't want you to spend any of your money anywhere else. And when it comes to the 'upgrade or perish' events, you will have no choice but to spend more money to keep absolutely everything you own from being obsolete and useless.

 

Even the screws that held the case together on the original Macs were patented, proprietary, and the tools were only available to Apple.

 

Apple makes fine hardware and has a decent OS.

 

BUT

 

Apple doesn't play well with others. If they did, I'd buy more Apple products.

 

Insights, incites and a minor rant by Notes

[KuruPrionz]

If Apple would get with the standards, I'd buy more of their products.

Damn right! And we would still have floppy drives!

So you are saying floppy drives are still standard?

 

I still have some in a closet if you want to buy some. I'd have to clean the dust off first.

 

But beware, they are PC formatted (Or IBM as we called them back then). When I started writing styles for Band-in-a-Box I learned that I could trade floppy disks with any platform that BiaB worked on, except Apple. Their format was exclusive. (I could even swap disks and files with an Atari computer)

 

And if I managed to get a compatible BiaB style file onto a Mac formatted disk, the Mac still couldn't read it because their file format was different. Mac files ignored the dot-3 identifier and needed a Mac Header. I paid a yearly fee to be a Mac software developer and get priority tech help, but the techs said that the information to put a Mac header on the files was proprietary, and they can't share that information with me.

 

Fortunately, some hackers published how to do it, and PG Music had already supplied me with what that header information should be.

 

Apple wants to keep you in "Apple Jail" (or as they market it, their ecosystem). They don't want you to spend any of your money anywhere else. And when it comes to the 'upgrade or perish' events, you will have no choice but to spend more money to keep absolutely everything you own from being obsolete and useless.

 

Even the screws that held the case together on the original Macs were patented, proprietary, and the tools were only available to Apple.

 

Apple makes fine hardware and has a decent OS.

 

BUT

 

Apple doesn't play well with others. If they did, I'd buy more Apple products.

 

Insights, incites and a minor rant by Notes

 

The last Atari computer was made in 1993, I was 28 years younger then.

You might want to reconsider your last statement, many things have changed since then.

 

USB flash drives, SD cards and SSDs are almost entirely produced and formatted for the Billy G Box.

I can pop any and all of them straight into my Mac and they come up immediately, ready for service.

It's not difficult to install Windows on a Mac as a separate drive partition. It runs fine.

 

I'm not a hacker, I use the Mac system that Apple sends me. Band in a Box is Mac compatible, some Mac users probably run your programs on a Mac, which is good for your business.

Meanwhile, I haven't found a way to prevent Microsoft from updating Windows 10, they are relentless. If you need the internet, your computer will be updated, good bad or indifferent.

 

My Mac lets me know when updates are available, I don't have to install them. The Big Sur system update is sitting there, waiting. It has a long time to wait.

My conclusion is that BOTH Windows and Mac "put you in jail" in their own ways, it's simply a matter of choosing your jail cell.

In that context, which is pretty real world, your statements are amusing.

[analogika]

The macOS is based on Linux IIRC

 

It absolutely is not. It's certified UNIX, based in large part off a fork of BSD.

 

Apple's penchant for exclusivity, though, has resulted in some questionable decisions. They collaborated with Intel on Thunderbolt, and I guess that to the victor goes the spoils. But the exclusivity meant Windows couldn't do anything for a year, and then had to play catch up. Thunderbolt has just now become more of an industry standard, and not a Mac-only thing.

Thunderbolt was *never* Mac-exclusive. In fact, Thunderbolt 2 first shipped on an Asus mobo in 2013, two months before Apple shipped their first TB2 machine.

 

Thunderbolt 3 had been shipping on Windows PCs for ELEVEN MONTHS before Apple finally added it to their MacBooks Pro in November 2016.

 

The staunch refusal of the bottom-of-the-barrel PC market to incorporate Thunderbolt is due to the fact that the controllers cost more than the dirt-cheap USB controllers that did most everything that ordinary Joes needed from a PC, and the inertia of using the legacy connectors and standards included with every generic motherboard.

 

The focus on the Apple market primarily has to do with that and the fact that Apple has been shipping all their laptops with TB3, and nothing but TB3, for five years now.

 

And, the exclusivity within Apple itself is puzzling. Why can't you run iOS apps in macOS?

I would have said that this is because apps designed for touch-first SUCK on a mouse-based interface.

 

And while that is still true as far as I'm concerned, you CAN run iOS apps on macOS, since the release of Big Sur a year ago. The developer just has to set a flag to allow it.

[analogika]

And if I managed to get a compatible BiaB style file onto a Mac formatted disk, the Mac still couldn't read it because their file format was different. Mac files ignored the dot-3 identifier and needed a Mac Header. I paid a yearly fee to be a Mac software developer and get priority tech help, but the techs said that the information to put a Mac header on the files was proprietary, and they can't share that information with me.

 

Fortunately, some hackers published how to do it, and PG Music had already supplied me with what that header information should be.

 

Was this header metadata part of what they abandoned over twenty years ago in the switch to OS X?

 

I *still* miss resource forks â app preference on a per-file basis, no fiddling with stupid file extensions that might apply to multiple applications⦠*sigh*

 

Even the screws that held the case together on the original Macs were patented, proprietary, and the tools were only available to Apple.

Nah, they were absolutely bog-standard hex screws â the upper two under the handle were just recessed so far that regular hex keys wouldn't reach.

[Anderton]

The macOS is based on Linux IIRC

 

It absolutely is not. It's certified UNIX, based in large part off a fork of BSD.

 

Yes, sorry about that, I get things with X on the end confused

 

Thunderbolt was *never* Mac-exclusive. In fact, Thunderbolt 2 first shipped on an Asus mobo in 2013, two months before Apple shipped their first TB2 machine.

 

According to both Apple Insider and Intel, it was indeed exclusive. The following is from Apple Insider in 2011, the year when Thunderbolt was first included on a MacBook Pro:

 

At a press conference earlier this morning, Intel offered additional information about its new Thunderbolt interconnect technology being pioneered by Apple in its latest batch of MacBook Pros, noting Apple will have a year long head start in deploying the technology.

 

PC makers are expected to begin adding Thunderbolt to their machines next spring, giving Apple a year to trailblaze the technology among high end users before it trickles down into the mainstream.

 

And another reference:

 

Apple just released their new MacBook Pros, and they included a port armed with a new feature called Thunderbolt. Apple worked a deal with Intel which gives them exclusive rights to the technology for 1 year (Sorry Dell & HP).

 

And, the exclusivity within Apple itself is puzzling. Why can't you run iOS apps in macOS?

 

I would have said that this is because apps designed for touch-first SUCK on a mouse-based interface. And while that is still true as far as I'm concerned, you CAN run iOS apps on macOS, since the release of Big Sur a year ago. The developer just has to set a flag to allow it.

 

Good to know, although my most recent Mac won't upgrade past Catalina so it's not relevant to me anyway, and I wasn't going to update my hardware knowing that Apple Silicon was on the horizon. But your comment again raises the question of why Apple seems uninterested in adding touch to laptops. Possibly it's because they want to steer touch-oriented people to the iPad as a logical step up from the iPhone, and also, an iPad Pro covers almost all the needs most people have for a laptop?

 

Bear in mind that I have 2 desktop Macs, 2 MacBook Pros, an iPhone 7, and just sold my iPad to someone who needed an old one to run the DigiTech iPB-10. However, all of them can no longer be upgraded except for the iPhone 7 (I can probably get one or two more updates out of it), so I'll be out of the "what's new with the Mac" loop until I can scrape together the bucks to replace the computer, phone, and tablet. That ain't gonna happen any time soon, especially because there's no Mac desktop on a par with the Windows desktop I use. So my Macs soldier on for my personal use, while Windows does the heavy lifting for audio and video production.

 

Obviously I have nothing against Macs from a technical or philosophical standpoint, or I wouldn't have so many Apple products. In fact for 10 years I was Mac-only, and started using Windows only because it could do true multi-tasking while the Mac was still using multi-finder. However in terms of cost-effectiveness and (believe it or not) reliability, Windows is the best solution for my needs at the moment. Nonetheless, I've switched platforms several times in the past, so in a year or two from now I might be running Macs, and having my Windows machines be my secondary computers. That choice is not up to me, it's up to the paths Apple and Microsoft take.

[analogika]

Thunderbolt was *never* Mac-exclusive. In fact, Thunderbolt 2 first shipped on an Asus mobo in 2013, two months before Apple shipped their first TB2 machine.

 

According to both Apple Insider and Intel, it was indeed exclusive. The following is from Apple Insider in 2011, the year when Thunderbolt was first included on a MacBook Pro:

 

At a press conference earlier this morning, Intel offered additional information about its new Thunderbolt interconnect technology being pioneered by Apple in its latest batch of MacBook Pros, noting Apple will have a year long head start in deploying the technology.

 

PC makers are expected to begin adding Thunderbolt to their machines next spring, giving Apple a year to trailblaze the technology among high end users before it trickles down into the mainstream.

 

And another reference:

 

Apple just released their new MacBook Pros, and they included a port armed with a new feature called Thunderbolt. Apple worked a deal with Intel which gives them exclusive rights to the technology for 1 year (Sorry Dell & HP).

 

Both of those are missing an actual quote from Intel detailing the "deal".

 

Because the "deal" was that they developed it jointly under wraps before officially announcing it to the world when Apple released the early 2011 MacBook Pro â and that was it.

 

There was no "exclusivity" once the standard was released â Apple were merely in on the development and thus had a head start on the industry.

 

https://techcrunch.com/2011/02/24/apple-has-significant-head-start-with-thunderbolt-but-not-exclusive/

https://www.engadget.com/2011-02-24-intel-refutes-apple-exclusivity-for-thunderbolt-i-o-lacie-and-p.html

 

The rest of the industry dragging their collective feet for almost a decade is *entirely* the industry's fault.

 

 

 

Oh and a clarification regarding iOS apps on Big Sur: Apple Silicon only, of course. (This, however, is an entirely understandable limitiation IMO.)

[Anderton]

Agreed, when a standard is announced to the world, it's no longer exclusive. But given that exclusive means "restricted or limited to the person, group, or area concerned," I think what Intel and Apple did qualifies as exclusive. Apple was able to get a head start on the rest of the industry because they had the exclusive ability to develop products for a year - certainly, no one else did. That's why I said "The exclusivity meant Windows couldn't do anything for a year, and then had to play catch up."

 

The rest of the industry dragging its feet could be for a variety of reasons, but I do think part of it was deciding whether to prioritize developing peripherals for a computer having less than 10% of market share at the time...especially with USB being a moving target as well.

 

IMHO, both USB and Thunderbolt have been somewhat of a $hit show - USB-IF couldn't even decide what to name their ports. And as you pointed out, USB has been so volatile that the initiative to embrace USB-C started with Micro-USB. Or maybe it was Mini-USB...or Nano-USB

 

At least it finally seems the situation might be stabilizing.

[analogika]

Yeah, I suppose being involved as a partner in development qualifies as "exclusive"â¦

 

USB has indeed been a shitshow â which "universal" "standard" includes no fewer than EIGHT DIFFERENT PLUG FORMATS?

 

USB-C is a clusterfuck inasmuch as the whole complexity is moved from the socket connector into the CABLE, with no way at all to tell what it will support â does it do Thunderbolt 3 full spec, or just USB 3.1 Gen 2 at 10 Gbit? Or USB 3.1 Gen 2 at 10 Gbit with DisplayPort? With or without Power Delivery? Or does it do 20 Gbit? Or just USB 3.1 Gen 1 at 5 Gbit? With or without DisplayPort? With or without Power Delivery? Or just USB 2.0 spec with or without Power Delivery, but no support for DisplayPort? Or does it have USB4 spec at 40 Gbit? Also, Power Delivery has various standards.

 

Which of those cables support DisplayPort Alt. Mode, I have no clue whatsoever.

 

I haven't been following too closely, but I'm hoping that USB4/Thunderbolt 4 is going to unify all that bullshit into a single, actual "standard". Not holding my breath, though.

[KenElevenShadows]

XLR. For everything. Thank you.