USB-C is ubiquitous today, whether smartphone, laptop, headphones, docking station or external SSD. The connection is universal, compact and can be plugged in on both sides. But as commonplace as it has become, users know very little about its name. The “C” in the name in particular is a constant source of speculation. Does it stand for “Connector”, for “Charging” or even for the shape? The short answer: none of the above. The long answer is a prime example of the often cryptic logic in the world of technology standards.
In fact, the “C” simply stands for the third generation of physical USB connection types. After USB-A, the classic rectangular type, and USB-B, which was mainly used for printers and older peripherals, USB-C followed as an evolutionary step towards standardization and user-friendliness. The naming is therefore purely alphabetical, no acronym, no technical abbreviation, but simple letter sorting.
The USB-C specifications were first published by the USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF) in August 2014 and since then the connector has caught on with impressive speed. The reasons are obvious: USB-C is reversible (can be plugged in on both sides), supports high data transfer rates (up to 40 Gbit/s with USB4), can transmit video and audio signals and allows charging capacities of up to 240 watts (USB Power Delivery 3.1). This combination makes the connection a universal tool for modern electronics. But the confusion remains. It is not uncommon for USB-C to be equated with the actual transmission technology, but “USB-C” is only the physical form of the connector. Which protocols – whether USB 2.0, 3.2, USB4 or Thunderbolt – run over it depends on the respective device and cable. This technical gray area is one of the main reasons for frustration among consumers: Not every USB-C cable charges at the same speed, not every one supports video and visually they are all the same.
The European Union has been trying to create clarity and order here for years. Only recently, new guidelines were passed that will apply from 2028: It will then be mandatory for even more devices to be equipped with USB-C, from laptops and digital cameras to mobile consoles. The aim is to reduce electronic waste, increase compatibility and end the charger chaos. A potential successor, such as a USB-D, therefore seems a long way off, both politically and technically. The status of USB-C is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, the connection is a milestone for technological standardization. On the other hand, the unclear communication about functions, standards and protocols is causing confusion among end users. The name USB-C suggests standardization, but in reality it is a collective term for different performance and transmission levels.
And so the “C” remains a symbol of the ambivalence of modern technology: simple to use, complex to implement. The fact that it is ultimately just an alphabetical iteration fits perfectly into the picture – an inconspicuous letter that shapes an entire era of connectivity without ever being explained.
Source: Futurezone
Zeige alle Kommentare an
Kommentar
Lade neue Kommentare
Urgestein
Ich weiß nicht, ich erlebe seit den USB-A Netzteilen kein "Ladegerätchaos" mehr. Lediglich ein Kabelchaos zwischen USB-A. C. mini, Micro und Lightning. was sich durch USB-C so langsam stabilisiert.
Wenn man sich dann kurz Gedanken macht, was Leistungsangaben auf Geräten zu bedeuten haben und seine grauen Zellen etwas anstrengt, kommt man selbst drauf, dass ich mit einem 15 Watt Handyladegerät keinen Laptop geladen bekomme und es bei nem Tablet entsprechend dauert.
Vielleicht währe es mal angebracht, die Grundlagen von Strom und Spannung in der Schule zu vermitteln, vor allen in einer Gesellschaft die sich seit Jahren über das Stromnetz doofdiskutiert ohne, dass viele überhaupt verstehen, was sie da nachplappern.
Antwort 3 Likes
Veteran
Es ist doch ein offenes Geheimnis, das die Verwirrung beim Endverbraucher Ziel des USB-IF ist.
Siehe:
USB 3.x Gen 1, Gen 2×1, 2×2. Das deckt 5, 10 und 20 Gbit/s ab.
USB4, USB 4v2, Gen2x2, 3×1 usw. usf. – Deckt 10, 20, 40 und 80 Gbit/s ab.
Warum also sollte dieses Ziel nicht auch die Stecker mit einbeziehen?
Antwort Gefällt mir
Alle Kommentare lesen unter igor´sLAB Community →
Editor-in-chief and name-giver of igor’sLAB as the content successor of Tom’s Hardware Germany, whose license was returned in June 2019 in order to better meet the qualitative demands of web content and challenges of new media such as YouTube with its own channel.
Computer nerd since 1983, audio freak since 1979 and pretty much open to anything with a plug or battery for over 50 years.
Follow Igor:
YouTube Facebook Instagram Twitter
Wir verwenden Technologien wie Cookies, um Geräteinformationen zu speichern und/oder darauf zuzugreifen. Wir tun dies, um das Surferlebnis zu verbessern und um personalisierte Werbung anzuzeigen. Wenn Sie diesen Technologien zustimmen, können wir Daten wie das Surfverhalten oder eindeutige IDs auf dieser Website verarbeiten. Wenn Sie Ihre Zustimmung nicht erteilen oder zurückziehen, können bestimmte Funktionen beeinträchtigt werden.
