USB-A

[Fishrrman]

The Mac blew up
Smoked the table
He had the right port
But used the wrong cable
(Burma Shave)

 

[Altis]

If those devices annoy you so much... don't buy them. Send a message.

And we arrive to what we call in math, the trivial solution -- the "0 = 0" equation.

When did I suggest I care what cable is in the box? What kind of a person would decide what device they buy based on what cable it comes with, as some have suggested here? "I was going to photograph your wedding with the A7RV but returned it because it came with a USB-A to USB-C cable!"

We're discussing whether it would be helpful for Apple to keep one or two USB-A ports, and now whether or not Type-A is obsolete or legacy. Nobody is saying it's a deal-breaker either way. Would you really avoid buying the Mini if it came with them? (or Studio which has them)

 

[theluggage]

If it were just a matter of TB3 being more of a linear chain (without branching) the TB4 better at branching (hence a hub or dock would be TB4), that I could get. But CalDigit had a TB3 dock (the TS3) before their TB4 TS4 model.

That's pretty much it. TB3 for high-performance PCIe devices - with max. 1 downstream TB port
TB4/USB4 for thunderbolt/USB4 hubs with multiple downstream TB4/USB4 ports.

The Caldigit TB3 dock only had lots of USB 3/Network/video/audio ports but only one downstream TB3 port but the TB4 one now has 3 downstream TB4 ports so it can act as a hub for Thunderbolt which is only possible with TB4.

I knew external SSDs tended to be TB3, not 4, but it's my understanding USB4 has also become an option, which I equate with TB4.

Last I looked, TB3 peripheral controllers provided 4 PCIe 3 lanes, which could run a fast NVMe x4 SSD. The "hub" capability in TB4/USB4 - which makes them better/cheaper for multiport hubs/docks - comes at the expense of 3 or those PCIe lanes which is why TB3 is better for NVMe drives. It's kinda moot though - if you're shelling out for a super-fast SSD you probably don't want it sharing a host port with 3 other TB peripherals/displays etc.

Of course, these things aren't cast in stone - new chipsets appear regularly, nor is the USB branding very well enforced (e.g. you'll often see USB 3 devices sold as Thunderbolt 3 compatible - which is true, tehy will work on TB3 ports!)

Theres a video from Sonnet here which may explain it better:

Thunderbolt Products - SONNETTECH

Thunderbolt 4 and Thunderbolt 3 docks, PCIe card expansion systems, eGPU boxes, 25GbE, 10GbE, 2.5Gbe and AVB adapters, and pro media card readers.

www.sonnettech.com

 

[PaulD-UK]

@drrich2 "If it were just a matter of..."

I'm afraid I can't make this simple, but it can be logically explained...

"But CalDigit had a TB3 dock (the TS3)..."

That was a (2016) first gen Intel 'Alpine Ridge' chipset TB3 dock.
Gen 1 allowed the PCIe 3x4 channels to feed bandwidth to any sort of device - one downstream TB3 daisy-chain port, NVMe SSD(s), one DisplayPort 1.2 (4K) monitor, multiple USB 3.1 Gen 2 hubs, E'net, Audio etc.
Very flexible, it allowed suitable controllers for each type of output.
That is why the CalDigit TS3 was so successful - lots of ports, with each getting its fair share of bandwidth.

In 2018 the Intel 'Titan Ridge' TB3 chipset replaced Alpine Ridge.
This upgraded the DisplayPort to v1.4, and allowed the bandwidth for two 4K or one 5K monitors.
But nothing's for nothing...
This meant only one USB 3.1 gen 2 Hub (10GBps) was allowed, and so Caldigit couldn't upgrade the TS3 dock.

"So Thunderbolt 4 would be preferable for a device chain that forks."

When Intel made the 'Goshen Ridge' TB4 chipset (2020) they only made one device controller chip, and that was a 3 downstream port TB4 hub (instead of only one for TB3).

However (nothing's for nothing...) this meant that a NVMe SSD is only allowed 10Gbps bandwidth (which is not enough!!!)

And there are NO USB 3.0/1/2 gen 2 controllers, as the Mac's (Apple) version of the Host Goshen Ridge (type) chip retains control of the USB hub/ports in the dock.
Which in a Mac is a single 10Gbps USB 3.1 gen2 stream.
(Actually there has to be a USB controller just for the use of TB3 mode, if the host Mac only has TB3 ports).

That means TB4 is only for hub use.
For devices, like NVMe SSDs, then Goshen Ridge is more of less useless, and another chip, the ASM2464PDX, which is a USB4 controller has to be used.
Which uses the TB4 protocol, but gives all the PCIe bandwidth to the SSD.

Or TB3 enclosures can be used...

EDIT: On topic, NONE (none) of the above is possible with only USB-A ports... 😵‍💫

 

[Ethosik]

Back in 2016 with the first USB-C Macbook Pro, I would agree. Today, almost everything is available in USB-C. The few things that aren't, you can buy a $1 adapter or a $10 hub.

Obviously I haven’t seen every keyboard and mouse in existence, but those are still USB-A. This is extra important with desktops.

 

[Certificate of Excellence]

That would have just furthered the ambiguity problem that @johnmacward was describing instead of working to resolve it. USB-A only delivers power in one direction and one of the features of USB-C is that it's bi-directional.

They could of course update them so they could carry power in both directions, but that would only exacerbate the confusion because now you don't just have to make sure your origin and termination ports are the right shape, you also have to separately account for the direction of the cable.

I don’t really see the problem with single direction cables but my point was to engineer these usbc innovations (higher data transfer rate, power etc) into the usba foot print. I’m not saying no to usbc but I’m not at all married to the one cable for everything approach either.

Truthfully, Ive had a much higher failure rate with usbc cables and especially ports supplying power than I ever had with the sturdier usba foot print. This also is probably coloring my less than rosy lense of usbc technology.

 

[Edouard Perreault]

As an increasingly common port, USB-C is clearly on its way to dominating the market one day; just look at its ever-increasing popularity (especially in recent years on all the latest computers, tablets and phones). Even if for now USB-A is still present on most common devices (such as keyboards, mice, USB sticks, printers, microphones, speakers, etc.), how can we really complain about it when we consider the undeniable advantages of this new type-C port that combines compatibility, thinness and speed? For example, given the thickness of the current MacBook Air, USB-A would be too thick to be on one of its sides; like on the back of the Mac mini M4 where the thickness of a USB-A port would eliminate two thunderbolt ports. We benefit from a multifunction port that can power screens, multiply several other types of ports (USB-A, micro SD, HDMI) if necessary, and offer an ever-increasing bandwidth speed.
Personally, on my desktop computers, I still always use four USB-A ports for disks, keys and speakers, which means that on my Mac mini M4, I could no longer do anything! 🤨😫
No, I'm kidding; a single $15 USB-C hub plugged into the back of the mini immediately provided these four ports, leaving me with a nice margin of two Thunderbolt and two Type-C ports. 😮
Personally, that suits me and we will follow the transition to USB-C smoothly as it happens with HDD vs SSD drives.

 

[smirking]

I don’t really see the problem with single direction cables but my point was to engineer these usbc innovations (higher data transfer rate, power etc) into the usba foot print. I’m not saying no to usbc but I’m not at all married to the one cable for everything approach either.

The hit and run "USB-A must die" snarkers aside, the USB-C caucus doesn't care that much either. I haven't seen anyone say that they're offended if something isn't USB-C. Quite the opposite, we have no hesitation to buy USB-A plug devices. We just slap a $1 adapter on the end and don't ever think about it again.

We just prefer USB-C ports because it's so much easier to adapt USB-A to USB-C than the other way around. I do have a few USB-C to USB-A adapters though.

Truthfully, Ive had a much higher failure rate with usbc cables and especially ports supplying power than I ever had with the sturdier usba foot print. This also is probably coloring my less than rosy lense of usbc technology.

But that's always the cost of shrinking things. Things getting more compact has more pros than cons in my book so I'm willing to accept that there will be tradeoffs.

On the other hand, one of the benefits of smaller tech is that it also creates interesting opportunities for creative problem solving. They're already producing "magsafe" style USB-C plugs.

USB C Magnetic Adapter Thunderbolt 3 100W 20Gb/s 4K @ 60Hz Magsafe Right Angle | eBay

ã100W Fast Chargingã The USB C Magsafe adapter supports up to 100W (5V/3A to 20V/5A) pass through charging. ãUSB C Magnetic Adapterã The MagX is a USB C Magnetic Adapter that supports both charging and data transfer.

www.ebay.com

 

[drrich2]

As an increasingly common port, USB-C is clearly on its way to dominating the market one day; just look at its ever-increasing popularity (especially in recent years on all the latest computers, tablets and phones).

It's not 'dominating' that people take issue with, it's this determination some people have to exterminate USB-A so there is only USB-C, even in situations where USB-A is handy to have and likely to remain so quite awhile.

Yes, in some devices USB-C is practical and A is not. I know of no one pushing for the iPhone to switch to USB-A, for instance. But when some devices used mini- and micro-USB connectors, we didn't rail against USB-A ports and demand the world switch to mini- or micro-USB.