EU standardizing around USB-C, death of lightning in sight

[Ghost_MH]

2 hours ago, Jason said:

 

I think they didn't have enough bandwidth for a full fourth Thunderbolt port because the HDMI port they provide only does HDMI 2.0 even though the Thunderbolt ports can do HDMI 21. People in the comments of this Ars Technica article think it's because of the 7+GBps SSD.

 

The new MacBook Pro seems to have an HDMI 2.0 port, not 2.1

ARSTECHNICA.COM

---

120 Hz 4K monitors aren't the norm today, but they probably will be later.

 

If they had the bandwidth but decided that people would appreciate not needing a dongle for USB-C to HDMI cable more than not having a fourth Thunderbolt port, you'd think they'd have at least provided HDMI 2.1 instead.

 

I haven't been able to find full details on the M1 variants, but I'm basing my assumptions here in what's available on the Mac Studio with the same M1 Max you can get in the MacBook Pro. Even then, I miscounted.

 

The M1 Max Studio has...

4x 40Gb Thunderbolt 4

1x 18Gb HDMI 2.0

2x 20Gb USB-C USB 3.2 Gen 2

2x 5Gb USB-A USB 3.1 Gen 1

1x 10Gb Ethernet

 

The M1 Ultra Studio has...

6x 40Gb Thunderbolt 4

1x 18Gb HDMI 2.0

2x 5Gb USB-A USB 3.1 Gen 1

1x 10Gb Ethernet

 

I'm assuming the HDMI, USB-A, and Ethernet ports are all sharing a lane. That comes out to just under 40Gb which is very coincidentally the same as the Thunderbolt 4 lanes. That means the M1 Max has 6x40Gbps of bandwidth while the M1 Ultra can handle 7x40Gbps.

 

The bandwidth should be there to spare. The M1 Max Studio doesn't have Thunderbolt up front and it's not listed as such on the hardware. That's kind of bullshit, but that's still more than the 3x Thunderbolt 4 and 1x HDMI 2.0 on the MacBook Pros with the same CPU. I'm positive the issue is they use the same chassis on MacBook Pros with a sad M1 and M2. Both of those are likely very limited on bandwidth and Apple likely has no desire to mill out additional MacBooks with different ports.

[johnny]

are there more doors or wheels in the world? 

[CastlevaniaNut18]

I really didn't realize charging cables were such serious business. Also, am I doing something wrong, because I've hardly ever had a cable screw up or become frayed.

 

I just don't think a ton about it. I have lightning for my iphone and ipad, USB-C for my Switch and current gen controllers, and I have a Kindle, so I still have to use a micro-USB. It's a minor annoyance, having to carry 3 different cables when I travel, but I never think too much about it.

[Kal-El814]

1 hour ago, TwinIon said:

Oddly enough, I think think the mess that is USB-C standards is a good reason why this legislation is more benign than it might seem in that it shows how flexible the port is in what kind of connections it can handle.

 

My Dell laptop has a USB-C port that can handle Thunderbolt 3, but it's also a proprietary Dell connection that allows for more power than the USB spec allowed at the time (I think it's up to 180W, when the max official spec was still 100W). Much has been said about how the Switch USB-C port isn't entirely standards compliant. Google, Samsung, Qualcomm, Motorola, and others already have fast charging standards that only work at full speed when you have a compatible charger, cable, and device, but also still work at standard rates with any random charger.

 

Apple could build a USB-C port into an iPhone that can charge from any charger but will only pass data to a certified device or doesn't pass any data at all. They could build their own communication protocol on top of existing USB standards, much like they do with bluetooth with their headphones. They can build their own charging tech on top of USB-PD so that iPhones charge much faster from Apple's own chargers than they would elsewhere. All told, the constraints are relatively limited and I wouldn't expect to have a material impact on what Apple or anyone else decides to do with the port.

 

To wit, I have an Apple branded Thunderbolt 3 cable that charges my MacBook Pro, passes audio, video, and KVM via my monitor so I can use my wireless mouse and keyboard when I switch from my gaming PC to my Mac even though the wireless dongles are all plugged into my monitor. It passes audio, video, and does the KVN thing when I use that same cable with my work Dell. I have a Belkin Thunderbolt 3 cable that, from what I can see on the package, should do the same. It will do the all the same stuff with my MacBook Pro except charge it, but it does literally nothing with my Dell at all. No charge, KVM, or even push A/V.

[Ghost_MH]

45 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

To wit, I have an Apple branded Thunderbolt 3 cable that charges my MacBook Pro, passes audio, video, and KVM via my monitor so I can use my wireless mouse and keyboard when I switch from my gaming PC to my Mac even though the wireless dongles are all plugged into my monitor. It passes audio, video, and does the KVN thing when I use that same cable with my work Dell. I have a Belkin Thunderbolt 3 cable that, from what I can see on the package, should do the same. It will do the all the same stuff with my MacBook Pro except charge it, but it does literally nothing with my Dell at all. No charge, KVM, or even push A/V.

 

That cable is likely not rated for carrying power. This will all be a LOT easier now that stuff like USB-C USB 3.2 Gen 2 isn't a thing anymore. Going forward, a good docking station cable will be named something like USB-C USB 40Gb/90w.

[Kal-El814]

10 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

That cable is likely not rated for carrying power. This will all be a LOT easier now that stuff like USB-C USB 3.2 Gen 2 isn't a thing anymore. Going forward, a good docking station cable will be named something like USB-C USB 40Gb/90w.

 

It is, I just assumed it's not up to passing power through my monitor.

[Ghost_MH]

4 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

It is, I just assumed it's not up to passing power through my monitor.

 

I don't think that's actually a thing. You more than likely have a lying or a misleading cable. Cables with fraudulent specs are ALL over Amazon and the rest of the Internet. It's the source of a lot of headaches and most people's issues with buying USB-C cables. It's either that or your cable is rated to carry power, but not more than like 10w while the monitor is trying to pump out 45w or 90w.

[Kal-El814]

1 minute ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I don't think that's actually a thing. You more than likely have a lying or a misleading cable. Cables with fraudulent specs are ALL over Amazon and the rest of the Internet. It's the source of a lot of headaches and most people's issues with buying USB-C cables. It's either that or your cable is rated to carry power, but not more than like 10w while the monitor is trying to pump out 45w or 90w.

 

Amazon.com

SMILE.AMAZON.COM

 

 

[Ghost_MH]

4 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

 

Amazon.com

SMILE.AMAZON.COM

 

 

 

Thunderbolt 3 cables don't always carry USB signals, so either your cable is broken or you have a Thunderbolt 3 cable that doesn't want to carry USB. This isn't a thing with Thunderbolt 4 since the standards are merging, but it is a thing for Thunderbolt 3. Your monitor is likely USB.

 

Actually, Belkin labels this right in the specs for the cable on Amazon's site. It only works with USB 2.0 and Thunderbolt 3.0. Your monitor likely won't send power down the cable when it detects a USB 2.0 signal.

[ort]

4 hours ago, CastlevaniaNut18 said:

I really didn't realize charging cables were such serious business. Also, am I doing something wrong, because I've hardly ever had a cable screw up or become frayed.

 

I just don't think a ton about it. I have lightning for my iphone and ipad, USB-C for my Switch and current gen controllers, and I have a Kindle, so I still have to use a micro-USB. It's a minor annoyance, having to carry 3 different cables when I travel, but I never think too much about it.

 

It all depends on how much you use the phone while it's plugged in. If you're constantly twisting and pulling on the cable they go bad eventually. If you don't, they last years and years.