alt Hacker NewsWhich is worse because they all look sort of the same, but they are not the same.
It's even worse for non-techies, who don't understand what a gbps or a watt is, and who will leave a 1-star review, or worse, trash their cable, because their cable was "slow" but was meant for 240W PD but only supported USB 2.0. They purchased it initially because it had 5 stars.
Ideally, there should only be "5 star" USB cables, and they should all work for all purposes that they can physically plug into.
The situation in the early 2000s is I could spot the cable I needed from a mile away.
Replies
USB 2.0 cables can be thinner, more flexible, longer, and cheaper. You could decide to only ever use thunderbolt cables for everything, but you'd be paying $40-$100 for a cable as thick as a mains power cord and doesn't offer any benefit at all to charging your phone.
We need better labeling rather than making every single USB cable a 40gbit thunderbolt cable.
Just about every data cable standard has different speed capabilities on a per-cable basis. Ethernet, HDMI, and displayport have the same issue and usually with even worse labeling.
> Ideally, there should only be "5 star" USB cables, and they should all work for all purposes that they can physically plug into.
That requires they never increase the speed again. Seems like a bad starting point.
And most people will accept the tradeoff of different cable speeds when it means long charging cables can be 10x cheaper. The problem is when manufacturers choose to use bad labels.
And if you push people off USB they're going to use 27 different kinds of cable and you won't be able to spot which generic black wire you need from across the room.
Also, if we pretend they set the max speed in stone in 2013, it's easy to get yourself a full set of 240W 10Gbps-per-lane do-everything cables in every length from 0 to 2.5 meters. $25 isn't an amazing price but sticking with passive cables keeps you out of the real nasty prices.