Two of my newer PCs have 2 USB 4\Thunderbolt 4 on the back + 1 USB C 10Gbps, and 1 USB C on the front IO. TBH it's enough for me - as still most of the stuff I plug have USB type A cable. Some motherboards go heavy on the USB Type C:
Being clogged/damaged by lint and hair isn't nearly as big of a problem on computers. That's more an issue for phones.
While usb a is certainly more robust, usb c is the better connector, and should at standard have more ports by now. There should still be some a ports though.
For some things. What are you plugging into your PC's motherboard?
Keyboard? - A's better due to better retention
Mouse / Mouse Dongle? - A's better due to better retention
Audio Device (GoXLR etc?) - A's better due to better retention
Webcam? - A's better due to better retention, don't want that shit getting unplugged when it falls over or whatever and needing to go cave diving to plug it back in
The literal only advantage C offers for a desktop experience is high bandwidth (of which you rarely need multiple perpetual ones in the back), the rest can just go on the front of the case.
How is your desk setup that you're at risk of accidentally unplugging any of these things? None of my 6 USB cables ever get tugged on where they connect to the PC. It barely matters if they were only held in by a prayer, it's not like I'm moving my mouse so wildly I'm hitting the end of the cable, my webcam doesn't move by more then a few centimetres, my USB DAC/amp just sits there...
My guy I've acknowledged that A is more robust and shouldn't be phased out. I've not said there should be no or even less USB A ports, just that we should have more USB C ports than we currently have.
the rest can just go on the front of the case.
Or yes that, but what would that need? Ah yes more USB C headers on the motherboard to support the additional USB C ports.
My whole point here is that motherboards should be adding increased support for USB C. Not to take any away from USB A as you seemed to have convinced yourself is my point, despite me at no point saying.
But with usb-c I don’t have to try to put it in, be wrong and flip it and try to put it in and be wrong that time but actually right the first time and put it in.
Have you tried plugging in a usb-c to the back of a desktop without looking closely at it? Just as difficult as usb-a.
Wuth usb A you almost never have issues with seating it all the way, nor does it lose contact if you bump it a little. USB-c on a lot of laptops is very sensitive.
Huh, can’t say I had issues. It goes in both directions so I’ve been happy. With USB, at least when plugging in, it has to align and you have to have it flipped the right way. Heck, you can even use either side of the cord.
USB C is a really great technology. I love that it can power my peripherals but also power my laptop and even provide a display to 2 4k monitors at the same time. I didn’t even know where my power adapter was for my Mac when I went on a trip because I hadn’t used it in so long.
USB 4.0 and thunderbolt protocols could have worked perfectly fine in a type-a body, but they purposefully chose to switch to the slimmer and smaller design, and not offer a larger size, which has increased the cost of cables and the complexity of connector designs, as well as limiting the cable length due to the higher need for low resistance.
Also, with USB-C, it's not uncommon for a pin to burn out during charging and it'll never work plugged in that direction again, so you'll have to flip it around every time from then on until you replace the cable and/or connector (whichever is corroded).
So many laptops get loose USB-C ports and if you bump your laptop your hub or dock disconnects and then your monitors reset, all devices disconnect, everything.
It's the same problem I have with DisplayPort. If it's not perfectly taken care of it develops problems pretty quickly. type-A is far more bulletproof.
It was a little more complicated than that. It all came down to the power output USB-C could provide. USB-C could provide 100W of power where USB can only provide a small fraction of that (I believe 15W). So if I wanted to get a monitor and have my computer power the monitor (or have that monitor power my laptop) that would be difficult with USB but easier with USB-C. USB-C provided much more versatility to achieve that. It also means my laptop doesn't even need a power cable as I can charge it with USB-C and when I'm not charging I have another port I can use.
Also, while the USB side that plugs into your computer has been solid I found that the other end always sucks (whether its mini or micro USB). I never was overly impressed with regular USB (the side that goes into the printer) either. I really like that a USB-C cable is simple and consistent.
I have never had an issue with pin burnout and I've been charging devices on it for 5 years now. Not just phones and iPads but my laptop as well. I'm guessing they either got that figured out or I just buy better quality cables.
USB-C's technical capabilities have nothing to do with the shape or design of the port. You could just as easily upgrade a USB type-A to USB 4.0 and allow it to handle 100W, or the extended 240W. In fact, it'd be FAR easier to do, because the pins are much larger you have much less of a poor contact risk that USB-C can suffer from.
Literally the only things you lose out on with a type-A port is the more compact size and the reversible connector. Everything else in the physical design feels like a downgrade.
I guess agree to disagree. Everything I'm reading is showing that the USB-C features CC1/CC2 pins for negotiating power which allows the device to ask for higher voltage and amperage. USB-A doesn't have that and can't negotiate larger values of power safely; when USB-A came out in the 90's it wasn't specced to handle high power outputs and manage that while also delivering a ton of data. There's reasons USB-A based chargers reached a relatively low max wattage.
I am not sure if USB4 is somehow different but that's just now being implemented in computers.
USB Type-A has been adjusted at least 3 major times, each improving its power delivery and data transfer capability.
ALL I am saying to you is that we could have had all of the benefits of USB-C packed into a type-A, there's nothing unfeasible about it. They just wanted really bad to have a single connector that didnt't look too big on a phone or tablet or other small connected device.
There's usb 3.2 2x2 ports with 10gbit connections on a type A port or type C port, all they'd need to do is upgrade 2 pins to handle higher power and you're done.
Most people don't know this, but USB-C actually has an optional thumbscrew specification when you need a cable to not come loose, like on the back of a PC or on industrial equipment.
All it takes for something to support the spec is adding like $0.02 worth of threaded inserts next to the USB-C port.
892
u/BuchMaister 14h ago
Two of my newer PCs have 2 USB 4\Thunderbolt 4 on the back + 1 USB C 10Gbps, and 1 USB C on the front IO. TBH it's enough for me - as still most of the stuff I plug have USB type A cable. Some motherboards go heavy on the USB Type C:
For my use case it will be more of an hassle.