EVERY single USB-C cable should have the USB type and bandwidth printed on the cable.
Like this one (see pic).
I'd also vote for some sort of "raised dot" standard for visually impaired folks.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/6/23948486/usb-c-cables-marking-speed-power-delivery-elgato
#USB #USBC
@davemark This is great! There is also room for improvement. Vital stats are power delivery and data speed, yet “3.0” tells me nothing.
USB-C cables labeled like “100W, 10GB” would be perfect.
@Vorsos @davemark Did you know, there are actually labels for plugs and ports defined in the USB Type-C Cable and Connector standard released by the USB Implemented Forum.
The one in the picture is not one of them, it‘s also not really helpful. So it’s either a very old cable or a non-certified, meaning not-reasonably tested, cheap cable which will not necessarily actually deliver what they wrote on that plug.
@MacLemon @Vorsos @davemark
And the cable is 100% not faulty, it works perfectly for data transfers, it even works with a different phone. So when I'm looking for a cable to charge my phone, I have to remember to not use this one. What good is having a unified port if the rule of thumb is still to use the original charger/cable — not for optimal results, sometimes to work at all? 🤷
@m0xee It was even worse before USB as I‘ve iterated upon in my USB talks. :-)
For USB (Type-C) charging there are multiple parties involved. The charger, the cable, the device and the protocols to negotiate how power is transferred. Via standard USB PowerDelivery or one of the MANY proprietary charging implementations. (This is covered in my second USB talk in detail.)
It‘s not easy to single out the one culprit in that constellation. It may well be a combination that fails.