Rendered at 10:08:55 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
ryandrake 6 hours ago [-]
> But I shouldn't have had to do any of this. It's time cables came with a label of their own, or some sort of color coding.
There shouldn't even need to be a label. A USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable. There should be a single connectivity/performance spec, and if the cable meets it, it can be called a USB-C cable, and if it doesn't, it should have to be marketed as USB-JUNK or something.
This is what happens when the spec is awful and says "the cable must do 480Mbps, or it must do 40Gbps, or... whatever, have fun!"
Kirby64 6 hours ago [-]
Unless you want all cables to be thick, $60, and cap out at 1 meter long, this is not a reasonable standard. 480mbps USB-C is perfectly adequate for many applications. Likewise for 60W cables.
ryandrake 6 hours ago [-]
So, call it USB-D or something, if one cable is significantly different (in purpose, performance, form factor) than another cable. Don't just call everything the same label, and let the non-technical buyer beware.
stouset 6 hours ago [-]
Okay, great, it’s called USB-D. Is this a new connector? Or do we now need to resort to labeling cables and checking the label?
Do we do this for every new version and combination of versions for USB? USB-PD? Thunderbolt? DisplayPort?
dmos62 2 hours ago [-]
Ehem, we already do that. USB-C is an umbrella term and everyone has a homebaked organizing system to tell which USB-C cable can do what, or a homebaked testing routine where we run through 5 cables each time we need to connect something.
That's what the article is about. Calling all these cables USB-C and making them look indistinguishable is a very leaky abstraction.
ReactiveJelly 5 hours ago [-]
The computer / phone should auto-detect and tell you on-screen
mrheosuper 4 hours ago [-]
They've already done that afaik, like warning about charging at slower speed.
zx8080 5 hours ago [-]
The hell Apple or Google cares.
QuantumNomad_ 4 hours ago [-]
Apple should care because customers will blame slow charging times and slow transfer speeds on the phone
stingraycharles 3 hours ago [-]
I think Apple much rather tells users that this is exactly what they warned them about when they were forced to support USB-C and will advise users to only buy official cables from Apple.
5 hours ago [-]
Kirby64 6 hours ago [-]
USB-A has many variants and we don’t call it a different connector. Heck, USB-B and micro USB both have 3.0 variants that are physically different and we don’t call them something different either. I don’t see the problem here. This is just semantics, especially when they aren’t even labeled period… people just see a cable and will try plugging it in.
godelski 3 hours ago [-]
> USB-A has many variants
> especially when they aren’t even labeled period
What are you talking about? USB-A is color coded. You'll frequently see white and blue. Admittedly this is harder with USB-C because the size, but I don't see why we can't label these things. Not labeling just leads to confusion and fraud.
The color coding is optional and ambiguous: Blue is recommended, not required, and there is no difference for 3.0, 3.1 (10gbit) or others. And you now also have red, yellow, green, purple and orange, which have no defined meaning in any standard and are just whatever a manufacturer wants to do. There is nothing preventing someone from selling standard 4 conductor A ports with red coloring.
ryandrake 5 hours ago [-]
The other USBs are no better TBH. I still remember USB Full Speed and USB High Speed. Do you remember, without looking it up, which one is faster? Same form factor, same physical connector.
Kirby64 5 hours ago [-]
USB2 has been backwards compatible from the beginning though. I can’t think of a time in the past… 15, maybe 20 years where a USB cable wasn’t capable of high speed, unless it didn’t have data lines at all.
(And yes, I don’t need to look it up. But also I’m extremely familiar with the USB spec and have been tangentially involved with the USB-IF)
godelski 3 hours ago [-]
No, but I can tell you which is faster by looking at the color
cameldrv 5 hours ago [-]
There are names for all of the features. It would be cool if there were some sort of color code or physical indication of a cables capability, but one of the cool things about usb-c is that the same connector works for really cheap stuff and really high end stuff. For example, in a pinch I can charge my MacBook (slowly) from a $5 gas station usb charger.
malkia 3 hours ago [-]
USB-C1, USB-C2, USB-C3, etc... we had the CAT naming for a while
locknitpicker 3 hours ago [-]
> So, call it USB-D or something,
USB-C is the connector type, not the cable. The connector type supports multiple protocols, including for interoperability with other connector types as a cable can have USB-C in one end and something else in the other end and users expect the cable connection to just work the USB way.
MetaWhirledPeas 6 hours ago [-]
The naming could be better for sure.
honkostani 3 hours ago [-]
[dead]
revolvingthrow 6 hours ago [-]
I have several 1m long TB4 cables (100W, video, 40Gbps) and they’re neither particularly thick nor were they anywhere close to $60.
The best you can get is TB5 (240W, up to 120 Gbps data transfer) and at 1m long they’re $32 or so from CableMatters. Those are admittedly somewhat thicker, but not stiff.
I wish there was a higher baseline data transfer mandated for usb-c. Sure, 40gbps isn’t needed for all cables, but is some piddly 5gbps too much to ask? We had usb 2.0 speeds back when CPUs just barely entered 1 GHz range, it’s practically ancient technology. Admittedly most people never transfer any data over usb, but with this logic we might as well have usb-c that does charging only. Being able to pick any cable and have 5 gbps baseline means that any usb-c cable is fundamentally usable, if slow. 480 mbps is… ugh.
I don’t have an issue with 60W being the baseline, it’s enough for most laptops and the average GaN charger is 65 W (or less) anyway.
Kirby64 5 hours ago [-]
> Sure, 40gbps isn’t needed for all cables, but is some piddly 5gbps too much to ask?
5gbps means you add 8 additional wires to every cable, and also would require that both devices on each side implement 5gbps PHYs for their USB (if you mandated it on devices too). It’s a large cost, especially when you’re talking about billions of cables.
maccard 1 hours ago [-]
And for the applications it not adequate for, a different cable should be used. But instead I have a drawer full of USB c cables and no idea which ones are which.
pimterry 1 hours ago [-]
> A USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable.
This would completely defeat the point.
There is a range of needs for cables. Some devices have simple needs for power/data transfer/extra functionality, and some devices have more. A $3 USB-powered lamp does not need a cable for gigabit data transfer and 100W charging - this cable would be more expensive than the product. Similarly, new features & performance levels will emerge and we want to be able to use these in new cables backward compatibly.
Given a range of needs, you have two options:
- A single cross-compatible connector, but with a range of capabilities
- Different types of connector for every capability
We used to be in the latter situation, USB-C is an attempt to do the former. Having different capabilities for same-shaped cables is the goal.
Labelling would be great, but standardizing one single spec for all cables would defeat the point.
stouset 6 hours ago [-]
> There shouldn't even need to be a label. A USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable.
Then USB is forever frozen in time, unless we start using new connectors.
This was the tradeoff we got when standardizing on one connector. The protocol versions change (USB, USB-PD, Thunderbolt), the cables that go between each connector change based on the needs of the spec they supports. But the connectors stay the same.
In my opinion, this was a poor tradeoff and now we’re living in the hell we asked for.
If you want every cable to support the latest and greatest of whatever exists as of right now, you can do that. By all means, buy Apple’s USB-C Thunderbolt 5 cables. They’ll run you $70 apiece but you’ll be buying a cable that makes no compromises.
My personal approach is to just use whatever cable came with the device for anything for which that’s convenient and plausible. For mobile devices with relatively limited charging speeds over USB-PD and for which portability and durability are typically important, I buy the latest Apple woven cables. For high-bandwidth devices I spend the big bucks on the Apple Thunderbolt 5 cables. I discard any cables of unknown provenance.
kuboble 3 hours ago [-]
> now we’re living in the hell we asked for
N=1, but my quality of life has greatly improved. Literally all devices I use daily (laptop, phone, mp3 player, Bluetooth speaker, headphones) I charge from a single cable.
I'm still grateful for this unification every time I charge my phone via the laptop charger.
stouset 24 minutes ago [-]
Now we live in a world where any cable can connect any two devices, but what happens and what’s supported is a complete and total crapshoot. The more devices and cables you own, the more chaotic things become.
I have devices that take USB-C cables but won’t charge if the cable supports USB-PD.
I have a monitor that supports Thunderbolt 3 and two Thunderbolt 3 laptops. It took me multiple tries with various switches and Thunderbolt cables to find a combination that worked.
I have had multiple other situations like this, and the only practical solution I’ve found is to aggressively get rid of cables of questionable provenance, unless you can keep them permanently connected to or associated with the device they came with.
I suspect I’m running into this sooner than most because I’ve gone all-in on USB-C. I have gotten rid of every device possible that used USB micro or USB-A.
For simple electronics that just need to charge? Fine, sure, outside of random cable/device pairs charging slower than expected, it’s nice. For anything that actually depends on features on the cable or on a combination of features supported by the devices on each end? Total chaos.
pwagland 1 hours ago [-]
Exactly this. Or charge my laptop via the phone cable, sure, it's slower, but it still works.
riffraff 3 hours ago [-]
I'm also happy we have a single connector but, n=1, I have a couple things that will not work with all cables.
I have no idea why, nor have I bothered to find out, I just marked the cables they came with (which are USB-A to USB-C) same as GP did.
mrheosuper 2 hours ago [-]
>I have no idea why, nor have I bothered to find out
The reason is simple; your device violated the USB-C spec by saving $0.0000002 of BOM cost
Yujf 3 hours ago [-]
There is no hell. Just buy a couple of good cables and life is nice
fragmede 5 hours ago [-]
> just use whatever cable came with the device
the problem comes when the device and cable get separated, and the cable is "helpfully" organized into the bin with the rest of the USB-c cables.
tosti 3 hours ago [-]
Oh how this brings back memories of finding all my cables all rolled up and tucked together as if a cable is a cable.
amelius 39 minutes ago [-]
There should be proper error correction. So you will have "this is a fast cable" versus "this is a slow cable", and NOT "this is a good cable" versus "this is a broken cable". Unfortunately, the second situation is the one we're in.
XYen0n 6 hours ago [-]
USB-C is just a connector. A cable can be a USB-C connector USB 3.0, power delivery 3.1 cable, or it can be a USB-C connector Thunderbolt 4 cable, or it can be a USB-C connector DisplayPort 1.4 cable.
yjftsjthsd-h 3 hours ago [-]
IIRC you can also run USB 2.0 over a c port
mrheosuper 3 hours ago [-]
You can have power-only cable (no data transfer) because the PD protocol does not use any usb data wires.
mikeweiss 6 hours ago [-]
I think you didn't put a lot of research in before making this recommendation. Labels make more sense because the top tier USB c specs are darn expensive.....
mrheosuper 4 hours ago [-]
Because the spec is applied for either $1 Chinese toy or $10000 Apple Mac studio. Such dynamic range requires a lot of detail
kakacik 1 hours ago [-]
Spec range is not the issue, its the inept thinking of designers that people should qll become little detectives and find out themselves what which cable does. Which is ridiculous assumption and judt doesnt work in real life.
Clear big labeling saying version, speed, watts or similar mix so everybody can quickly glance and know whats being sold. Whatever chinese crapware has mislabeled is another topic.
r_lee 2 hours ago [-]
then how do you update capabilities/the spec? like 240w usb PD?
locknitpicker 3 hours ago [-]
> There shouldn't even need to be a label. A USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable.
I think you are confused. USB-C refers to the connector type, not the cable, let alone the protocol.
Also keep in mind that the standard supports cables with USB-C connectors in one end and USB-A connectors in another end. What do you expect the USB-C end to do?
Latty 3 hours ago [-]
Do people really not remember the hell of every device having it's own cable which was incompatible with all the others? Going around to a friend's house and finding out, no, they don't have the cable that can charge your phone.
It is a strict improvement to be able to transfer data or charge at degraded speeds, compared to not being able to plug it in at all. Wanting all your cables to end up entirely incompatible just because you don't want to bother checking labels (modern cables come with clear ones, I have ones that clearly say 40Gbps/240w on them) is, frankly, silly.
hurfdurf 2 hours ago [-]
A USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable. There should be a single connectivity/performance spec,
In the latest version it even doesn't crash the computer anymore after rapid plug/unplugging action.
xbmcuser 4 days ago [-]
LTT has created true spec cables with the actual spec mentioned on the cables but they can not keep up with demand despite being expensive get sold out as soon as new stock comes in.
They are not TB5 compatible though, and if you are going to drive monitors through it, or connect external GPU, 120Gbit (TB5) is much better than 40Gbit TB4 gives you. If you are willing to pay a bit more, consider TB5 cables from CalDigit, StarTech, CableMatters, or Apple.
braiamp 44 minutes ago [-]
I can't find it anymore, but I'm pretty sure that the only reason they don't say it support TB5 is because they would need a license to say so.
rationalist 12 hours ago [-]
By chance, has anyone tested Cable Matters' cables?
I just bought a couple of their Thunderbolt™ 5 cables. They seem like a reputable company that would make their cables true-to-spec. Thanks in advance!
RestartKernel 10 hours ago [-]
I bought a 3-meter long USB C cable from them for data and display transfer, which turned out to be the only USB C cable of that length capable of driving my display at its full resolution and framerate. However, after a year of use, it stopped transferring any sort of data. So while they're probably up to spec, the quality isn't necessarily what their pricing may suggest.
Support allowed me to send it back for replacement as a "one-time exception", though I was well within the common 2-year warranty period in the EU.
malfist 11 hours ago [-]
I've not spec tested them, but astronomy gear is notoriously picky about USB cables and since I switched all of my cables to cable matters a lot of weird behaviors just stopped happening
exmadscientist 9 hours ago [-]
We had good results testing Cable Matters stuff here at work, but that was for non-critical use so I didn't go too hard on the tests. (Actually, I didn't go too hard on any of it since it was mostly make-work from a manager trying to cause trouble, but still....)
I was quite impressed by GlobTek (available at Digi-Key) and have been buying those when I need something nice. Their USB-C line are some of the best I've seen, not that I'm a connoisseur.
ThePowerOfFuet 11 hours ago [-]
They are excellent.
Ekaros 3 hours ago [-]
Didn't they not care enough and not put vendor id on their cable. Which results some devices rightfully refusing to operate at high powers... Or am I miss remembering something.
HDBaseT 10 hours ago [-]
I have a few of these cables, pretty decent although I think the USB-C ports are a bit too thin? They feel lose in multiple of my devices
JR1427 3 hours ago [-]
Multiple people I know, and myself included, have experience failure of their USB-C port on their phones.
I don't think they are really durable enough.
Cieric 10 hours ago [-]
They also crackle out of the package, or at least the 5 I got did. Kind of sound like the thin glow sticks a bit.
verandaguy 8 hours ago [-]
Could that possibly be shielding?
I can't say I've seen it on USB-C-esque cables (except maybe a thunderbolt cable a while back?) but I've seen some cables use a type of aluminum or mylar-looking foil between the outer rubber sleeve and the inner sleeves and wires.
exmadscientist 7 hours ago [-]
That shield is a drain wire combined with either a woven braid (most effective at lower frequencies) or a solid aluminized mylar foil (most effective at higher frequencies), or, for the best cables, both together.
A USB-C cable really should be shielded. Here's a cross-section I took of a nice full-featured USB-C cable: https://ibb.co/svR5Yvyr . You can see the VBUS/GND (fat red/black), the SS pairs (white plus red/blue/yellow/brown, each one foil shielded on this cable), the USB 1/2 pair (white/green), and then the CC and SBU stuff is the remaining wiring. Notice how not just the whole thing is braid+foil shielded, but the SS pairs are individually shielded; that's really important at these speeds, and what you want to see on a good cable.
Compare with two USB 2.0 cables: https://ibb.co/BHz4v1mx and https://ibb.co/GfpJmgbx ; the first one has the shield braid, as it should, but everything else is nicer on the second one. Cables!
aeroevan 12 hours ago [-]
I managed to get a few and so far am impressed. They are definitely on the chunky side but that probably comes with the durability
Gigachad 7 hours ago [-]
My concern is stiffer cables are likely more likely to rip USB ports off the PCB. A lot of devices provide very little support to the USB port which is basically just hanging off pads on the PCB, so a stuff heavy cable could provide a lot more bending force to rip it off.
Phones and macbooks have it done right where the outer portion of the port is built in to the device body, but most other devices don't do this.
TheTxT 5 hours ago [-]
They’re chunky, but very flexible. There’s basically no memory effect to them either, so they don’t try to curl up on their own.
The problem isn't inherently USB, it's companies producing cables without properly defining specs.
If you want to be certain a USB cable works, buy it from a brand that sells certified (USB-IF) cables with a particular spec you want. For example, Club3D.
Yes, they'll cost more but you can be decently certain that you don't have to fiddle with it. I replaced all USB cables I own with certified ones. Since then, not a single issue with slow charging, display resolutions, frames, or data transfers.
DrJaws 34 minutes ago [-]
just don't buy cables from generic or awful brands, you can go with some reputable ones like cablematters,startech, caldigit, or satechi, also you can check USB-IF members. For other cables like displayport, just buy only certified cables that can be checked on displayport site, before buying any.
same for thunderbolt, etc.
you may pay a bit more, but they will comply the specs and be higher quality than the other generic brands.
ChrisMarshallNY 11 hours ago [-]
As always, these testers (the affordable ones) are capable of testing continuity, and, I guess, the cable chip report.
If you want to test bandwidth, that's a five- or six-figure bit of gear.
nerdsniper 8 hours ago [-]
This keeps needing to be pointed out every thread this appears on. Plenty of cables have eMarkers that claim "40Gbps" or whatever speeds, or support 240W PD...but absolutely cannot deliver either of those. And none of these consumer level testers can test either of those claims.
Resistance measurements can cursorily test claims of 240W but resistance changes with temperature which changes with current...so unless your tester puts 5 amps down the wire for 5 minutes and then tests resistance it's not a very good test.
consp 1 hours ago [-]
I had a cheap no-name cable which claims 3.1 speeds (and thus needs a marker), though it lacks all differential pairs and borks every usb connection (after I cut it, it was obvious). No clue why it contains a marker chip but doesn't have any conductors. Likely for usb-pd but you do not want to put any power though it anyway as the conductors were cheap copper clad aluminium.
maya335 8 hours ago [-]
Yeah — "the eMarker said 40Gbps" is basically the same problem as trusting the print on the jacket.
For home use I've ended up treating real capability as an empirical property of the specific cable+port+device combo: does this exact cable drive this monitor at the mode I want, under load, for an hour? If yes, it gets a colored heat-shrink band and never leaves that use case. Everything else is a phone/charge cable until proven otherwise.
mshroyer 6 hours ago [-]
Why on earth is so much more expensive than an arbitrary pair of devices that could max out a cable?
ChrisMarshallNY 6 hours ago [-]
Think about it.
You need to generate a precise, calibrated, 40GHz signal, transmit it, then precisely measure the returned signal for phase, amplitude, and waveform integrity -at that speed.
Oscilloscopes and logic analyzers that run at that speed, are damn expensive.
roaringrocky 2 hours ago [-]
But for bandwidth can't you just have two simple computers at either end that can send a 100GB file and if it arrives in 20 seconds, you know you have 40gbps of bandwidth?
traceroute66 1 hours ago [-]
> But for bandwidth can't you just have two simple computers at either end that can send a 100GB file and if it arrives in 20 seconds, you know you have 40gbps of bandwidth?
Because that is not reproducible and introduces all sorts of other random variables to your test.
Expensive equipment is the only answer here.
Its a bit like when you ask an electrician to install network cable (yuk !).
They consider their job done after a continuity test (if they bother to do a continuity test at all).
Meanwhile, if you put a Fluke on it, you will pick up all sorts of subtle faults that the electrician's continuity tester will never pick up, but will cause subtle and hard-to-diagnose problems when you try to push data over the cable.
Its the same thing with all those cheap USB testers.
They might have all sorts of fancy displays, but in the end they are no substitute for the real thing and will end up lulling you into a false sense of security.
CamperBob2 4 hours ago [-]
Someone could do an equivalent-time sampling instrument for not much money, if the market were there. It's probably not, though.
LiamPowell 2 hours ago [-]
Testing in that way will only tell you if the two devices work with the given cable. It won't tell you what sort of margins you have. Not all devices are made equal.
A device isn't even necessarily better if it works with one cable when another doesn't, it might just happen to have a slightly lower impedance on its internal traces that happens to better match an out of spec cable, or any other one of a number of parameters.
6 hours ago [-]
Gigachad 8 hours ago [-]
It’s much cheaper to just buy your cables from Apple or LTT knowing they tested them on a 6 figure testing rig.
I throw out every usb cable that comes bundled with devices because they are literal junk.
"If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it. Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead. If you flag, please don't also comment that you did."
synack 6 hours ago [-]
I came up with a color code based on the wiring: Red for Power Only, Blue for USB 2.0, Green for USB 3 (the ones with the extra pairs connected). I use paint pens to mark every cable I come across with this code. Generally speaking, only the Green ones have special PD emarker chips.
It doesn't cover every possible configuration, but it's good enough for when I'm like "I need a USB cable" vs "I need a good USB cable"
As much as the original author bemoans having to do the labeling themselves, 99% of people don't care or don't have such a mix of cables as to make it a challenge to find one to suit the task.
If you care, then care enough to do small, practical things for yourself. A little loop of tape. Paint marker. Even just sorting them into drawers/boxes/whatevers by type.
Kirby64 6 hours ago [-]
E markers are required for USB3, so that’s why. If you have a cable capable of 100 or 240W, they will also have a marker (it’s required), even if they only do USB2 speeds.
happymellon 5 hours ago [-]
I thought blue indicated USB 3.0?
hmng 2 hours ago [-]
I know things have become much more complicated, but still remember fondly the good intentions of the original USB spec, which, for instances, forbade any extension cables (ignored, as expected, by many), with the reasoning that users should expect that if a cable connects, it should just work. Longer cables would need to be electrically "better", and extensions would eventually cause issues with electrical paths that were too long.
People still remembered the "black art" involved with, e.g., SCSI cables, where long chains would often had issues, and wanted to avoid that.
kiwijamo 11 hours ago [-]
Interestingly, I have found a very mixed bag of USB-C cables I've collected over the years to generally just work for all my use cases. I can charge my various USB-C laptops at 65W with all the USB-C cables I have on hand. Maybe it's just my habit of just buying cables from known brands (Belkin is normally my go to) but I also have random cables that came with various devices of varying quality and all these also work just fine. I have a 6-port charging hub so I can see the charging wattage and I can easily get 65W to various laptops and a high capacity power bank, regardless of the cable being used. All cables also work fine for data transfer, although I confess I use USB-C for data transfer rarely so it is possible there is some variability there. YMMV but I wonder how much of this issue is just crappy low-end cables?
ssl-3 9 hours ago [-]
Every not-broken USB C cable allows for 480Mbps USB 2 speeds and 60W charging. In USB C terms, it doesn't get any more basic than this; that's as low-and-slow the specification tolerates.
The issues come into play with going beyond that. USB 3 speeds? USB 4? Thunderbolt? DisplayPort (4k uncompressed video!) alt modes? 240W charging? These are all practical things that regular people use USB C cables for every day, but they require very specific support from the cables themselves, and that support is widely varied.
Your cables work fine for what you're doing with them, but you're really barely scratching the surface of the kinds of things that can be done. :)
retatop 8 hours ago [-]
Not that I disagree with you, but I _wish_ "regular people" used 240W charging every day. As far as I can tell it's still pretty niche and hard to get 240W chargers
BobbyTables2 7 hours ago [-]
Just convince the auto industry to use USB cables for electric car charging!
My desktop “server” with two 4K monitors doesn’t even reach 240W !
lostlogin 3 hours ago [-]
An arm Mac mini server in my basement has averted 4.9w over the last month.
denkmoon 7 hours ago [-]
What device would I encounter in my day to day which would use 240W charging though?
Gigachad 8 hours ago [-]
It’s because you are using the lowest use case for usb (like most people). Literally everything can manage 65w power only.
All of these “usb sucks” posts are about using multiple 4k 120hz monitors dasychained while pumping 140w and a handful of other dongles hanging off which pushes usb to the limit and requires carefully selecting the highest quality cables.
socalgal2 10 hours ago [-]
It's surprising to me you've been that lucky with Belkin. They do not have a good reputation. Maybe cables are easy so that's an easy bar to pass.
wslh 10 hours ago [-]
What 6 port charging hub do you have? I have a broken UGREEN one.
bariumbitmap 6 hours ago [-]
> Any cable that can transfer data faster than USB 2.0 speeds also requires a chip to do so.
I always found this confusing because USB 3.0 Micro-B cables can transfer data faster than USB 2.0 without needing an e-marker, so why do USB-C cables need one if they already have the Tx and Rx SuperSpeed wires?
It seems like the answer is, roughly, "it's complicated".
If you’re following USB-C standard, all cables with faster data than 480mbps and more power than 60W require an e marker, period. Whether devices will still function for USB3 without that marker… that’s another story and will depend on the device.
bariumbitmap 5 hours ago [-]
I'm not disputing that the e-marker is required by the USB-C the standard, I'm saying that conceptually it's confusing that an e-marker is required for USB-C cables but not for a USB 3.0 Micro-B cable with the same wires and data transfer capabilities.
palmotea 6 hours ago [-]
I use one of these to check the wiring of the USB cables I get, especially if I'm getting a weird one. I've always been a little freaked out by the story of that Google employee who posted very trusted USB-C cable reviews to Amazon, then got his equipment fried by one that crossed the wires.
The Treedix cable tester is awesome. Ordered one after reading Terence Eden's positive review* and went through all my cables the day it arrived. My favorite was the cable with only the ground connected; went immediately into the bin.
It definitely looks to be one of the better ones. Since many of these products use same generic Chinese platforms, I looked for a similar product on Aliexpress since they have better shipping for me, but didn't find a full analog. Had to use a forwarder to order from Treedix—only to have it shipped in a very roundabout way from China.
This effectively only tells you what the E-Marker reports though, the actual capabilities of the cable are still unknown.
You can say the cable can do whatever you want on the E-Marker, its not the source of truth.
The problem is, to actually benchmark everything, voltage drop, resistance, actual bandwidth (especially at Thunderbolt 5 speeds) requires a lot of hardware.
Oscilloscope is needed for things like frequency response.
but most consumer care only the power loss and bandwidth only.
pmarreck 8 hours ago [-]
well, that's disappointing; someone needs to miniaturize that and reduce the cost massively
Kirby64 6 hours ago [-]
It’ll never happen. Measuring to the proper Thunderbolt spec is only possible on literally the most cutting edge measurement equipment. Physics just won’t permit that being a gadget you can buy for $20 of whatever.
Useful app, funny thread (centipede), and the MacRumors Bartender alternative link arising from the menu bar decision discussion means I might be able to ditch Ice! (reduce spacing instead)
justinator 10 hours ago [-]
It's not actually free, it's $14 to unlock all the features.
justinator 10 hours ago [-]
Can't actually read the Verge without a subscription either.
orbital-decay 6 hours ago [-]
That's an ad. There's a lot of cable testers around, most of them are crap. Cheap testers like this one are based on generic chips reading e-markers and aren't even guaranteed to support all quick charging standards. And bandwidth is another matter entirely.
Terr_ 6 hours ago [-]
Yeah, I found it odd that the author started talking about bandwidth and data concerns, but then testing part is only about power-transfer.
mercurywells 10 hours ago [-]
I'd like a HDMI cable tester as well, I can't seem to find one that works well with my high refresh monitor.
b3lvedere 4 hours ago [-]
I have had this problem with a 4K tv. I just bought an 8k certified cable. Overkill usually solves a lot of those issues in my personal experience.
whatever1 4 hours ago [-]
Apart from the specs of a cable is there a way to verify the signal quality of a cable? I have lost many days trying to debug random hardware issues and the final answer was to just replace a cable.
pogue 4 days ago [-]
Is there a cheap, reliable tester that someone can recommend that will test multiple USB cable types (A, micro & C)?
This is the one I use and I quite like it. I've had it for a little over a year and a half. I used it to sort (or trash) all my cables and to test new incoming cables.
Casteil 8 hours ago [-]
I just got this one a few days ago so it's kinda weird I've seen it mentioned or posted about multiple times since. Guerrilla marketing?
Anyway, it's definitely better than having nothing, and tests resistance as well. I tossed a couple low value/duplicate/high resistance cables because I've got too many just lying around causing clutter. Also helped 'confirm' my good (e.g. TB4+) cables that weren't labeled clearly are indeed good cables - granted, this is only as dependable as the marker chip the manufacturer added.
greenavocado 7 hours ago [-]
If you just want to know what wires sets you have in your USB cables you can get the Gikfun "USB Cable Tester - Fast Check for Type-C/Lightning/RJ45 | Tests Charging Data Transfer | Continuity Check Quick Cable Sorting"
It's only $14.
It even offers test pads you can use to test the cable with a much more expensive multimeter.
exmadscientist 9 hours ago [-]
I'm not so sure about cheap. All the cheap ones I've tried have been pretty flaky, and ended up in the junk bin. I picked up this guy for work: https://bit-trade-one.co.jp/en/adusbcim/ and it's been pretty good. That was a while ago though, and some of the cheaper ones might have caught up.
12 hours ago [-]
krzyk 3 hours ago [-]
Is there a similar one that could test also max data transmission available on given cable?
LiamPowell 3 hours ago [-]
At a minimum, if plugging it in to a device and measuring waveforms is good enough for your application, you need an oscilloscope with 10 GHz bandwidth or so (don't quote me on that, I don't remember the max speed used by USB). Scopes at that level require a whole lot of R&D and very expensive components so they're really not something you'd want to buy to check your own cables.
If you're talking about reading the e-marker then you can just plug it in to a device and use an app. Google will help you find one for your platform.
pmarreck 10 hours ago [-]
The whole space is so scammy that I'd pay for a good USB-C cable tester
rzzzt 10 hours ago [-]
But how can we know which tester is good and which one is scammy?
_kb 10 hours ago [-]
With a USB-C cable tester tester, of course.
testing22321 9 hours ago [-]
I’ll bust your trace buster buster!
pmarreck 8 hours ago [-]
I like your "who watches the watchers" reference, but AI's reviewing AI work, and notably, people reviewing people work, are subject to the same problem!
The same principles that worked for auditors tracking risk compliance in the 2000's now work for humans tracking AI-output risk compliance in 2026
kimjune01 8 hours ago [-]
for throughput, you can use a stopwatch and a big movie transfer from one end to another
j16sdiz 7 hours ago [-]
A consumer grade tester test only the continuity and read the chip.
To actually test for the bandwidth those are hell expensive.
Now people starting test for the chip, those scammers will install more fake chip ...
yreg 9 hours ago [-]
The Anker Prime 160W power brick shows the maximum wattage of the cables you plug in. It is also surprisingly small.
boplicity 9 hours ago [-]
I don't think there's a USB-C charger out there that can actually pump out anything close to their rated maximum.
I have not managed to stress test it yet, I believe that so far I saw it deliver ~100W max.
I got it for 110€ in some Amazon bundle together with 3 usb cables. Which is about the price of the 140W Apple brick. (We don't get the powerbricks included with the MacBooks.)
But Apple's is much larger, heavier and has a single port.
zx8080 5 hours ago [-]
For those who seeks a data speed, it's not. It's about power ratings, not data transfer.
ReactiveJelly 5 hours ago [-]
Today my phone said "Charging slowly" and it wasn't charging at all.
I miss MiniUSB. MiniUSB was always good to me.
TechRemarker 10 hours ago [-]
Started using whatcable.uk app. Been amazing at finally knowing cable speed, but also device max speeds, and everything in between, without having to carry around one of those digital dongles with more limited use.
user- 7 hours ago [-]
I swear ive read this exact same thread with the exact same truepsec cable mention with the exact same amazon link for recommendations.
Melatonic 11 hours ago [-]
If you want a super fast cable and high power thats where they get pricey. "Charge only" cables can often be fairly cheap and perform well even for laptops and high draw devices.
Melatonic 11 hours ago [-]
Isnt this what "USB-IF certified" is supposed to guarantee?
craftkiller 11 hours ago [-]
USB-IF certified is a certification that the cable follows the spec, but that spans usb 2.0-only cables up to USB4v2 cables. The tester shows you what the capabilities are.
The cables are supposed to be labelled with their maximum speed (5, 10, 20, 40, or 80 Gbps or nothing if no data) and maximum wattage (60W or 240W).
HOWEVER, I don't remember ever seeing a cable with such a label. I'm sure they exist, but I don't see them. Requiring products to be labelled, and treating mislabelling as fraud, could mostly solve this. It's definitely a real problem.
okanat 9 hours ago [-]
> Requiring products to be labelled, and treating mislabelling as fraud, could mostly solve this.
There are too many manufacturers to hunt. Basically USB-IF needs to stop almost all shipments in the world. That's not going to happen.
USB spec is completely open and free to obtain. While it allows people to develop and DIY many things, it also attracts bad manufacturers like flies.
Good certified cables with correct markings exist. There are companies like Cable Matters or Startech who bother to actually certify their cables and get USB-IF TIDs. They do cost you quite a bit money though. Here are some:
I have completely stopped buying USB. I only rely on thunderbolt cables and hubs now.
Dylan16807 12 hours ago [-]
Just measuring the power info is limited use. I'm sure there's value for some people, but I only need to keep track of 0-2 high power cables.
> Your no-brand 480Mbps USB 2.0 cable is indistinguishable from the super-fast USB 4 cable that can move 40 gigabits (around 5 gigabytes) of data every single second.
One of those is way thicker than the other, at least.
I would love for something to force a speed and power rating on USB-C plugs.
massysett 11 hours ago [-]
> I would love for something to force a speed and power rating on USB-C plugs.
This already exists. Cable makers can certify their cables and mark them with their data speed and wattage.
I buy only certified, marked cables. If I see an unmarked cable, I assume it’s slow and low-powered…which is good enough for some things.
Dylan16807 4 hours ago [-]
> This already exists. Cable makers can certify their cables and mark them with their data speed and wattage.
Obviously labeling is possible. I want it to be forced.
Whether that's the USB consortium having more power, or a legal requirement, or the biggest stores refusing to carry unlabeled cables.
> If I see an unmarked cable, I assume it’s slow and low-powered…which is good enough for some things.
That's a reasonable way to handle things. Lots of basic cables and only worry about the good ones. And if a cable is so bad that it's missing data wires or is too high resistance to get near 3 amps, it can go in the garbage.
avadodin 11 hours ago [-]
> One of those is way thicker than the other, at least.
I bet there's at least one brand with extra–thick plastic insulation.
mrtesthah 9 hours ago [-]
Instead of using a dedicated device, on Macs you can also use the WhatCable app:
This is really good. The base is open source, and has both GUI and a CLI. For the purposes of this article, identifying what each cable can actually do, that’s covered. There’s additional Pro capabilities that you can pay for.
jerbearito 7 hours ago [-]
Sure, but that doesn't allow the author to share an Amazon affiliate link for a product.
yieldcrv 7 hours ago [-]
I just pay a premium to a reliable source: Apple
Regardless of tests they do charge my most energy hungry devices and everything else
Many of us are privileged enough to make our lives easier in this way and haven't thought about it
b3lvedere 4 hours ago [-]
I don't know how my wife and kids are treating charging cables, but the cables seem not to live that super long in their hands :) So paying premium constantly seemed like a money sink hole for me. Strangely enough once they start to buy their own damn cables instead of me paying, the lifespan of said cables seemed to quadruple. Strange strange universe we live in. :)
r_lee 1 hours ago [-]
it's just psychology, there's not much thought when there just are cables around and new ones come when they break, but when you have to choose and buy ones yourself and look at the price tag and all that, you tend to place more value and significance to that thing and remember how much it costs etc...
I'd say most of us have experienced this ourselves in some form at some point in our lives
ahs1 11 hours ago [-]
hmm, how about just being able to infer the features of a cable by it's physical form factor? oh wait...
swrrt 9 hours ago [-]
then you have a bunch of cables and wires that with all different types of connector that you can 'easily' identify which one is for which device. sounds familiar hah
There shouldn't even need to be a label. A USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable should be a USB-C cable. There should be a single connectivity/performance spec, and if the cable meets it, it can be called a USB-C cable, and if it doesn't, it should have to be marketed as USB-JUNK or something.
This is what happens when the spec is awful and says "the cable must do 480Mbps, or it must do 40Gbps, or... whatever, have fun!"
Do we do this for every new version and combination of versions for USB? USB-PD? Thunderbolt? DisplayPort?
That's what the article is about. Calling all these cables USB-C and making them look indistinguishable is a very leaky abstraction.
https://www.corsair.com/us/en/explorer/diy-builder/storage/u...
(And yes, I don’t need to look it up. But also I’m extremely familiar with the USB spec and have been tangentially involved with the USB-IF)
USB-C is the connector type, not the cable. The connector type supports multiple protocols, including for interoperability with other connector types as a cable can have USB-C in one end and something else in the other end and users expect the cable connection to just work the USB way.
The best you can get is TB5 (240W, up to 120 Gbps data transfer) and at 1m long they’re $32 or so from CableMatters. Those are admittedly somewhat thicker, but not stiff.
I wish there was a higher baseline data transfer mandated for usb-c. Sure, 40gbps isn’t needed for all cables, but is some piddly 5gbps too much to ask? We had usb 2.0 speeds back when CPUs just barely entered 1 GHz range, it’s practically ancient technology. Admittedly most people never transfer any data over usb, but with this logic we might as well have usb-c that does charging only. Being able to pick any cable and have 5 gbps baseline means that any usb-c cable is fundamentally usable, if slow. 480 mbps is… ugh.
I don’t have an issue with 60W being the baseline, it’s enough for most laptops and the average GaN charger is 65 W (or less) anyway.
5gbps means you add 8 additional wires to every cable, and also would require that both devices on each side implement 5gbps PHYs for their USB (if you mandated it on devices too). It’s a large cost, especially when you’re talking about billions of cables.
This would completely defeat the point.
There is a range of needs for cables. Some devices have simple needs for power/data transfer/extra functionality, and some devices have more. A $3 USB-powered lamp does not need a cable for gigabit data transfer and 100W charging - this cable would be more expensive than the product. Similarly, new features & performance levels will emerge and we want to be able to use these in new cables backward compatibly.
Given a range of needs, you have two options:
- A single cross-compatible connector, but with a range of capabilities
- Different types of connector for every capability
We used to be in the latter situation, USB-C is an attempt to do the former. Having different capabilities for same-shaped cables is the goal.
Labelling would be great, but standardizing one single spec for all cables would defeat the point.
Then USB is forever frozen in time, unless we start using new connectors.
This was the tradeoff we got when standardizing on one connector. The protocol versions change (USB, USB-PD, Thunderbolt), the cables that go between each connector change based on the needs of the spec they supports. But the connectors stay the same.
In my opinion, this was a poor tradeoff and now we’re living in the hell we asked for.
If you want every cable to support the latest and greatest of whatever exists as of right now, you can do that. By all means, buy Apple’s USB-C Thunderbolt 5 cables. They’ll run you $70 apiece but you’ll be buying a cable that makes no compromises.
My personal approach is to just use whatever cable came with the device for anything for which that’s convenient and plausible. For mobile devices with relatively limited charging speeds over USB-PD and for which portability and durability are typically important, I buy the latest Apple woven cables. For high-bandwidth devices I spend the big bucks on the Apple Thunderbolt 5 cables. I discard any cables of unknown provenance.
N=1, but my quality of life has greatly improved. Literally all devices I use daily (laptop, phone, mp3 player, Bluetooth speaker, headphones) I charge from a single cable.
I'm still grateful for this unification every time I charge my phone via the laptop charger.
I have devices that take USB-C cables but won’t charge if the cable supports USB-PD.
I have a monitor that supports Thunderbolt 3 and two Thunderbolt 3 laptops. It took me multiple tries with various switches and Thunderbolt cables to find a combination that worked.
I have had multiple other situations like this, and the only practical solution I’ve found is to aggressively get rid of cables of questionable provenance, unless you can keep them permanently connected to or associated with the device they came with.
I suspect I’m running into this sooner than most because I’ve gone all-in on USB-C. I have gotten rid of every device possible that used USB micro or USB-A.
For simple electronics that just need to charge? Fine, sure, outside of random cable/device pairs charging slower than expected, it’s nice. For anything that actually depends on features on the cable or on a combination of features supported by the devices on each end? Total chaos.
I have no idea why, nor have I bothered to find out, I just marked the cables they came with (which are USB-A to USB-C) same as GP did.
The reason is simple; your device violated the USB-C spec by saving $0.0000002 of BOM cost
the problem comes when the device and cable get separated, and the cable is "helpfully" organized into the bin with the rest of the USB-c cables.
Clear big labeling saying version, speed, watts or similar mix so everybody can quickly glance and know whats being sold. Whatever chinese crapware has mislabeled is another topic.
I think you are confused. USB-C refers to the connector type, not the cable, let alone the protocol.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C
Also keep in mind that the standard supports cables with USB-C connectors in one end and USB-A connectors in another end. What do you expect the USB-C end to do?
It is a strict improvement to be able to transfer data or charge at degraded speeds, compared to not being able to plug it in at all. Wanting all your cables to end up entirely incompatible just because you don't want to bother checking labels (modern cables come with clear ones, I have ones that clearly say 40Gbps/240w on them) is, frankly, silly.
In the latest version it even doesn't crash the computer anymore after rapid plug/unplugging action.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfovjw7Ts_U&t=974s
I just bought a couple of their Thunderbolt™ 5 cables. They seem like a reputable company that would make their cables true-to-spec. Thanks in advance!
Support allowed me to send it back for replacement as a "one-time exception", though I was well within the common 2-year warranty period in the EU.
I was quite impressed by GlobTek (available at Digi-Key) and have been buying those when I need something nice. Their USB-C line are some of the best I've seen, not that I'm a connoisseur.
I don't think they are really durable enough.
I can't say I've seen it on USB-C-esque cables (except maybe a thunderbolt cable a while back?) but I've seen some cables use a type of aluminum or mylar-looking foil between the outer rubber sleeve and the inner sleeves and wires.
A USB-C cable really should be shielded. Here's a cross-section I took of a nice full-featured USB-C cable: https://ibb.co/svR5Yvyr . You can see the VBUS/GND (fat red/black), the SS pairs (white plus red/blue/yellow/brown, each one foil shielded on this cable), the USB 1/2 pair (white/green), and then the CC and SBU stuff is the remaining wiring. Notice how not just the whole thing is braid+foil shielded, but the SS pairs are individually shielded; that's really important at these speeds, and what you want to see on a good cable.
Compare with two USB 2.0 cables: https://ibb.co/BHz4v1mx and https://ibb.co/GfpJmgbx ; the first one has the shield braid, as it should, but everything else is nicer on the second one. Cables!
Phones and macbooks have it done right where the outer portion of the port is built in to the device body, but most other devices don't do this.
re: https://randsinrepose.com/guides/usb/usb-guide.html
Apple sells this $30 (0.5m) CalDigit cable https://www.apple.com/shop/product/hs9d2zm/a/ and this $70 (1m) Apple cable https://www.apple.com/shop/product/mdw94am/a/
There's also some interesting discussion of Thunderbolt 5 cables on reddit (6 months ago): https://www.reddit.com/r/UsbCHardware/comments/1r84q54/
If you want to be certain a USB cable works, buy it from a brand that sells certified (USB-IF) cables with a particular spec you want. For example, Club3D.
Yes, they'll cost more but you can be decently certain that you don't have to fiddle with it. I replaced all USB cables I own with certified ones. Since then, not a single issue with slow charging, display resolutions, frames, or data transfers.
same for thunderbolt, etc.
you may pay a bit more, but they will comply the specs and be higher quality than the other generic brands.
If you want to test bandwidth, that's a five- or six-figure bit of gear.
Resistance measurements can cursorily test claims of 240W but resistance changes with temperature which changes with current...so unless your tester puts 5 amps down the wire for 5 minutes and then tests resistance it's not a very good test.
For home use I've ended up treating real capability as an empirical property of the specific cable+port+device combo: does this exact cable drive this monitor at the mode I want, under load, for an hour? If yes, it gets a colored heat-shrink band and never leaves that use case. Everything else is a phone/charge cable until proven otherwise.
You need to generate a precise, calibrated, 40GHz signal, transmit it, then precisely measure the returned signal for phase, amplitude, and waveform integrity -at that speed.
Oscilloscopes and logic analyzers that run at that speed, are damn expensive.
Because that is not reproducible and introduces all sorts of other random variables to your test.
Expensive equipment is the only answer here.
Its a bit like when you ask an electrician to install network cable (yuk !).
They consider their job done after a continuity test (if they bother to do a continuity test at all).
Meanwhile, if you put a Fluke on it, you will pick up all sorts of subtle faults that the electrician's continuity tester will never pick up, but will cause subtle and hard-to-diagnose problems when you try to push data over the cable.
Its the same thing with all those cheap USB testers.
They might have all sorts of fancy displays, but in the end they are no substitute for the real thing and will end up lulling you into a false sense of security.
A device isn't even necessarily better if it works with one cable when another doesn't, it might just happen to have a slightly lower impedance on its internal traces that happens to better match an out of spec cable, or any other one of a number of parameters.
I throw out every usb cable that comes bundled with devices because they are literal junk.
https://github.com/Zetaphor/whatcable-linux
https://github.com/abrauchli/usbee
Might find this one relevant:
"If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it. Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead. If you flag, please don't also comment that you did."
It doesn't cover every possible configuration, but it's good enough for when I'm like "I need a USB cable" vs "I need a good USB cable"
I use this tester: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CF95VL2Y
If you care, then care enough to do small, practical things for yourself. A little loop of tape. Paint marker. Even just sorting them into drawers/boxes/whatevers by type.
People still remembered the "black art" involved with, e.g., SCSI cables, where long chains would often had issues, and wanted to avoid that.
The issues come into play with going beyond that. USB 3 speeds? USB 4? Thunderbolt? DisplayPort (4k uncompressed video!) alt modes? 240W charging? These are all practical things that regular people use USB C cables for every day, but they require very specific support from the cables themselves, and that support is widely varied.
Your cables work fine for what you're doing with them, but you're really barely scratching the surface of the kinds of things that can be done. :)
My desktop “server” with two 4K monitors doesn’t even reach 240W !
All of these “usb sucks” posts are about using multiple 4k 120hz monitors dasychained while pumping 140w and a handful of other dongles hanging off which pushes usb to the limit and requires carefully selecting the highest quality cables.
I always found this confusing because USB 3.0 Micro-B cables can transfer data faster than USB 2.0 without needing an e-marker, so why do USB-C cables need one if they already have the Tx and Rx SuperSpeed wires?
It seems like the answer is, roughly, "it's complicated".
https://old.reddit.com/r/UsbCHardware/comments/1ow1tpf/why_d...
https://old.reddit.com/r/UsbCHardware/comments/13j0gev/do_us...
https://www.tindie.com/products/bittradeone/usb-cable-checke...
But when I care about performance, I just get a cable from Anker and don't worry too much about it.
BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS: WHERE CAN I GET ONE OF THOSE TINY GREEN MILK CREATES IN THE PHOTO?
Looks like https://makerworld.com/en/models/1515018-110x110mm-square-st...
No handles.
*) https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2025/06/gadget-review-treedix-usb-c...
You can say the cable can do whatever you want on the E-Marker, its not the source of truth.
The problem is, to actually benchmark everything, voltage drop, resistance, actual bandwidth (especially at Thunderbolt 5 speeds) requires a lot of hardware.
Using a USB-C Test Controller ($13,000), connected to a Pro Keysight Infiniium oscilloscope ($258,809) is the proper way to test it. https://www.keysight.com/au/en/product/N7018A/type-c-test-co...
Oscilloscope is needed for things like frequency response.
but most consumer care only the power loss and bandwidth only.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47972511
This is the one I use and I quite like it. I've had it for a little over a year and a half. I used it to sort (or trash) all my cables and to test new incoming cables.
Anyway, it's definitely better than having nothing, and tests resistance as well. I tossed a couple low value/duplicate/high resistance cables because I've got too many just lying around causing clutter. Also helped 'confirm' my good (e.g. TB4+) cables that weren't labeled clearly are indeed good cables - granted, this is only as dependable as the marker chip the manufacturer added.
It's only $14.
It even offers test pads you can use to test the cable with a much more expensive multimeter.
If you're talking about reading the e-marker then you can just plug it in to a device and use an app. Google will help you find one for your platform.
The same principles that worked for auditors tracking risk compliance in the 2000's now work for humans tracking AI-output risk compliance in 2026
To actually test for the bandwidth those are hell expensive.
Now people starting test for the chip, those scammers will install more fake chip ...
I got it for 110€ in some Amazon bundle together with 3 usb cables. Which is about the price of the 140W Apple brick. (We don't get the powerbricks included with the MacBooks.)
But Apple's is much larger, heavier and has a single port.
I miss MiniUSB. MiniUSB was always good to me.
The cables are supposed to be labelled with their maximum speed (5, 10, 20, 40, or 80 Gbps or nothing if no data) and maximum wattage (60W or 240W).
HOWEVER, I don't remember ever seeing a cable with such a label. I'm sure they exist, but I don't see them. Requiring products to be labelled, and treating mislabelling as fraud, could mostly solve this. It's definitely a real problem.
There are too many manufacturers to hunt. Basically USB-IF needs to stop almost all shipments in the world. That's not going to happen.
USB spec is completely open and free to obtain. While it allows people to develop and DIY many things, it also attracts bad manufacturers like flies.
Good certified cables with correct markings exist. There are companies like Cable Matters or Startech who bother to actually certify their cables and get USB-IF TIDs. They do cost you quite a bit money though. Here are some:
https://www.cablematters.com/pc-1532-123-usb-c-20-charging-c...
https://www.cablematters.com/pc-858-123-usb-if-certified-usb...
https://www.startech.com/en-de/cables/1m-40g-usb4-cable
https://www.startech.com/en-de/cables/s2cepr1m-usb-cable
> Your no-brand 480Mbps USB 2.0 cable is indistinguishable from the super-fast USB 4 cable that can move 40 gigabits (around 5 gigabytes) of data every single second.
One of those is way thicker than the other, at least.
I would love for something to force a speed and power rating on USB-C plugs.
This already exists. Cable makers can certify their cables and mark them with their data speed and wattage.
I buy only certified, marked cables. If I see an unmarked cable, I assume it’s slow and low-powered…which is good enough for some things.
Obviously labeling is possible. I want it to be forced.
Whether that's the USB consortium having more power, or a legal requirement, or the biggest stores refusing to carry unlabeled cables.
> If I see an unmarked cable, I assume it’s slow and low-powered…which is good enough for some things.
That's a reasonable way to handle things. Lots of basic cables and only worry about the good ones. And if a cable is so bad that it's missing data wires or is too high resistance to get near 3 amps, it can go in the garbage.
I bet there's at least one brand with extra–thick plastic insulation.
https://www.whatcable.uk
Regardless of tests they do charge my most energy hungry devices and everything else
Many of us are privileged enough to make our lives easier in this way and haven't thought about it
I'd say most of us have experienced this ourselves in some form at some point in our lives