• cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I just wish they wouldn’t have chosen such a small, fragile connector. They need to mandate that all USB C sockets are to be on a user replaceable module. It’s a real pain in the ass to solder the high speed ones because they have a second row of pins underneath the connector.

    • Damage@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      IMHO as production of type-c connectors and ports ramped up, average quality went down. I’ve got oldish devices, among the first to introduce it, still making a perfect connection, and I’ve got newer ones that either always had poor connection or quickly developed it.

      Solder quality also makes a big difference, SMD ports are relatively easy to tear off the PCB.

      • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I’ve had 2x+ more failures of C ports than Micro, and I’ve had 10x more micro devices for far longer (starting around 2009).

        Supposedly C is more durable, but that hasn’t been my experience.

    • balsoft@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Honestly I’d love a backwards/forwards-compatible USB-C with a socket recessed deep into a device and some mechanical locking mechanism for strain relief.

        • imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Lol. USB C-XLR 🤣

          Honestly, XLR being such a sturdy as hell connector. Can’t go wrong with it. But maybe USB-C can fit in mini-XLR so it is not as bukly as a normal one.

        • balsoft@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Yeah, kind of. I was thinking of something smaller, so that the cable would be compatible with standard ports. Basically the locking mechanism should be almost entirely on the port side, with the cable itself only having a passive “receptacle” for the locking pins, so that it fits into existing ports.

    • cmhe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Yeah… I started using magnetic USB C adapters, because I fear that I accidentally damage them, or that I just wear it down. But those are a bit flacky…

      • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The magnetic adapters are not complaint with the USB specifications. Lots of people have actually had their devices damaged by them.

        • cmhe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          True. As aren’t USB-C extension cables.

          But, AFAIK, the issue is about the power rating. I buy these adapters that are rated for 120W, on devices that use 65W max, and hope for the best.

    • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      In this regard, the lightning cable was superior. That connection was solid and quite durable for its size. I will now accept my allotment of apple hate.