Don’t worry, I’ve seen them. While Micro USB 3.0 is longer, it’s also thinner.
Here’s the reason why Microsoft refused to adopt USB-C
Kyriacou points out many of the issues anybody who’s used USB-C has run into. “What happened with USB-C is the cables look identical, but they start to have vastly different capabilities. So even someone in the know, confusion starts to set in,” he argues
Charging can also be a problem
There’s also the issue, for Kyriacou, that people might try to charge their powerful Surface Laptop with an underpowered USB-C charger. If that happens and the laptop runs out of power, “they’re not going to blame the power charger at that point,” he says. “They’re going to look at us. The brand is at stake.”
Basically this is Microsoft’s stance towards USB-C
Rather than join its competitors in trying to push everybody forward into USB-C, educate consumers on how it works, and get the entire ecosystem sorted, Microsoft decided it was better to just opt out of the whole problem for now.
What Kyriacou is saying in a lot of words is the old Apple mantra of “it just works”. You plug in the dock and it just works without any surprises or confusion.
But the other shoe was that you had to use an apple ecosytem and that’s what I really dislike with Apple.
And now Microsoft is Apple and Apple is going universal…
Sure it would have been stupid to ditch USB-A. Only Apple can get away with it.
But people who buy Surface products want that it works today but they are also usually tech savvy and having at least 1 USB-C port seems like a better bet (for most people) for a product that is suppose to work for the next 4-5 years.
In that regard not including a USB-C seems short-sighted.
Apple kind of did it right with USB-C,
Official & certified Apple USB-C peripherals and cables just work.
So there’s no fuss Microsoft is facing.
Good old Open vs Closed platform argument.
Open platforms always face standardization issues.
Straight from the official usb datasheet. Otg protocol is only supported on mini connectors, e.g. micro-usb or usb-c. You may also want to consult that datasheet before you try to tell me that a micro-usb 3.0 port has the same capabilities as a usb-c 3.1 port.
Check it out. You can download datasheets on any usb protocol or port.
You should get acquainted with the difference between mini and micro USB because those are completely different things.
And I get the impression that you don’t know what OTG is. It basically lets you convert a micro port to a full-size type A port. If you already have a full-size port, you don’t need it. But nobody ever suggested having a full-size port in a smartphone, that just wouldn’t make sense.
Plus OTG converts the slave port to a master port.
Connecting a phone to an external HDD via a Micro-USB to Micro-USB cable wouldn’t work because both sides would ask for a master.
I think that scenario would depend on the micro-micro cable.
I remeber that I have seen some with built in otg Adapter on one Port.
But Micro B 3.0 should be also otg compatible.
It would work if you ground the middle pin on the phone’s side of the wire. But what’s your point?
@Alexander_Halbarth yes, micro 3.0 is fully backwards compatible with micro 2.0, including OTG. Which I can’t say about type C.
Just giving more information on what OTG is good for.
I think that USB-C, as of right now, is definitely a step to the future, but faces two problems:
-People don’t really need transfer speeds that are so high (Or else You’d just get a USB 3.0 SSD)
-The Maturity Of The Standard. This is self-explanatory.
This article seems to be worth posting here for discussion as well
Yeah I know how it works, even with some technical details, but I don’t understand why this topic was brought up…
Yes, i should have said mini/micro to cover all my bases. It doesn’t matter because i was simply referring to non-full-size ports. As to OTG, you need to study up on what that actually is. OTG is a protocol stacked on top of the standard USB Protocol. You see, normally USB devices operate in a host-client relationship. Meaning, there are USB-capable devices that act as hosts (PCs to give one prominent example) and are unable to function as a client (the reason why you can’t connect two computers with a USB cable). Then there are devices that function as clients (usb drives, media players, usb peripherals, etc.) and are unable to function as hosts ( the reason why you can’t connect two mp3 players with a USB cable and transfer data between them). You have to have a host on one end and a client on the other. That’s how it works.
USB OTG, on the other hand, is an additional protocol that allows a device to act either as a client or as a host. That’s what enables you to plug a usb mouse, keyboard, flash drive, etc. into your phone and be able to use it, because the phone is set up to act as the host. It just so happens that the USB consortium have set a requirement for only mini-A or mini-B usb connections ( their words, not mine) to be used on OTG capable devices. So although a micro-usb to USB-A adapter or a USB-C to USB-A adapter may be called OTG adapters, OTG really signifies the capabilities of the devices being used with the adapters, not the adapters themselves.
I don’t want to sound like a troll in this long discussion, as you all bring valid points for an against the different USB formats. However I do want to introduce this line of thought - “USB-C or any other port format for that matter, is just a patchwork until we get truly port-less/wireless portable devices”. And while I am sure many of you will argue with me that this is far-away dream, I think it is happening faster than one might imagine. Take for example the dying prominence of thumb drives and external hard drives, with the storage pricing dropping everyday, the cloud storage becomes bigger, cheaper and more appealing everyday, and it is already conveniently built in OS workflows. There are also wireless cameras, headsets, keyboards, mice, printers, monitors and even memory cards (ex. https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIACX95B16532&cm_re=wifi_sd_card--9SIACX95B16532--Product) Yes, some of these protocols are not as good as the wired options, but it is only yet. Remember the first WiFi routers, boy they sucked compared to wired ones, and now it is pretty much an expected way for connecting to internet. Wires, while cheap and effective, are still a nuisance, so the minute there will be a good enough solution people will flock to it and never look back… For now though most USB formats are safe, at least for a little while
Dude, I know how OTG works. You don’t need to explain me anything. But you don’t need OTG on full-size ports because they’re already host by defsult. I don’t understand why you brought this up, and the fact that you are at least considering OTG on type-A ports just shows that there’s something you don’t know.
You mention mini-A, so I assume your quote is from a really old source. Not sure when exactly OTG was introduced, but mini-A ports are long gone. Micro ports appeared later than mini, so maybe your source is from before micro USB was introduced, that’s why it’s not mentioned.
@Alexandr_Smirnov I still connect through a wire, because WiFi just doesn’t cut it with my 600Mbps connection. Even if it had the speed, ping would be too high. Same applies to other things like external storage. We can have wireless storage, but storsge speed keeps increasing and wired storage will probably always be faster than wireless.
Agreed, I still dream about port-less phones, the USB port can be hidden under the back cover for service / backup purposes.
Charging will be done via wireless charging (or removable battery ) and syncing can be done wirelessly via the cloud or local wifi sync (like iTunes or Zune)
I think it is the closest thing we can get to a truly wireless device.
Try AC router with high gain antennas to increase your speed and lower latency. [quote=“pauliunas, post:198, topic:4555”]
Same applies to other things like external storage
I was talking about cloud storage becoming an integral part of the OS, that change is there and seems like most users like it. [quote=“pauliunas, post:198, topic:4555”]
wired storage will probably always be faster than wireless
Probably not as wireless can be as fast as speed of light… But I am not even claiming that it needs to, it just has to be fast enough for 95%+ of users
Yeah, Windows 8 Skydrive integration was a godsend too bad they removed it in Windows 10 Now you have to choose which folders to sync and they take up space on your hard drive… And you can’t even access the files you didn’t choose to sync…
You reminded me of fiber optics Well, the thing is that wireless communication is sensitive to noise. And the more we use it, the more noise we generate. So, soon we will have to send trice as much data as we need, just for error correction.
Remember what Bill Gates once said about RAM?