Related
........................................http://pocketnow.com/windows-phone/report-microsoft-bringing-microusb-a-v-out-to-windows-phone-7
am I right to say that all wp7 phones have USB Host support ?
that would be real cool ( think of external key-board over usb)
ceesheim said:
am I right to say that all wp7 phones have USB Host support ?
that would be real cool ( think of external key-board over usb)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is more like a sampling of the goodness to come from the current crop of humble WP7 phones. The HD2 never had this A/V out ability. The HD7 clearly does have it...as well as all WP7 phones.
ceesheim said:
am I right to say that all wp7 phones have USB Host support ?
that would be real cool ( think of external key-board over usb)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Snapdragon does support it-- the Toshiba TG01 had it, and the HD2 had a (buggy) implementation hacked in. Issue is that any client devices will need their own external power source, because these phones aren't giving out any juice on their USB ports. So even if software support is added, if you have to attach a Y-cable and an AC adapter to plug in a keyboard (or lug around an extra set of batteries), then what's the point?
Also, most of the point of USB Host support is to be able to interface with external file storage, which is useless with WP7, or external devices-- also useless, as WP7 has no APIs to allow for apps to interface with such hardware.
or make a real cool OBD2/CAN logger/writer (auto motive )
amb9800 said:
Snapdragon does support it-- the Toshiba TG01 had it, and the HD2 had a (buggy) implementation hacked in. Issue is that any client devices will need their own external power source, because these phones aren't giving out any juice on their USB ports. So even if software support is added, if you have to attach a Y-cable and an AC adapter to plug in a keyboard (or lug around an extra set of batteries), then what's the point?
Also, most of the point of USB Host support is to be able to interface with external file storage, which is useless with WP7, or external devices-- also useless, as WP7 has no APIs to allow for apps to interface with such hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
because a/v of a movie through zune is a bad thing....
Not sure why this is just getting reposted around the web without question. A/V out over USB? Out to what? Nothing takes an audio/video input signal over USB-- it's not a video cable.
You can use the bus to transfer files or other data using your own protocols over USB, but USB 2.0 does not have enough bandwidth for (uncompressed) HD video output. If you send it compressed (presumably just in the original video format, as these phones are not powerful enough to transcode on the fly), then you're essentially just using the phone as a USB flash drive and thus would need a receiver (externally-powered) that can process the file and actually output the video. A simple MicroUSB port is not going to be able to output anything directly.
amb9800 said:
Not sure why this is just getting reposted around the web without question. A/V out over USB? Out to what? Nothing takes an audio/video input signal over USB-- it's not a video cable.
You can use the bus to transfer files or other data using your own protocols over USB, but USB 2.0 does not have enough bandwidth for (uncompressed) HD video output. If you send it compressed (presumably just in the original video format, as these phones are not powerful enough to transcode on the fly), then you're essentially just using the phone as a USB flash drive and thus would need a receiver (externally-powered) that can process the file and actually output the video. A simple MicroUSB port is not going to be able to output anything directly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This could be like in Apple devices where thy can recognize what is connected to port (headphone jack) and switch it to different mode...
elektrownik said:
This could be like in Apple devices where thy can recognize what is connected to port (headphone jack) and switch it to different mode...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apple devices can recognize that something's connected to the headphone or dock connector, but they don't reassign pinouts on the fly for non-proprietary connections eek. Using a MicroUSB connector to instead carry a video signal would probably require hardware changes (and violating the standard).
HTC's solution was to build ExtUSB, which fit MiniUSB ports but also added some extra pins for audio and video, and Apple of course has its dock connector, which has more than enough pins to reserve a few for video.
I am definitely pleased to hear about this. I am trying to get my wife sold on Android, but she wants an iphone just because it can dock with our sound system. *cringe*
ceesheim said:
or make a real cool OBD2/CAN logger/writer (auto motive )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All we need for that is serial bluetooth support.
amb9800 said:
Snapdragon does support it-- the Toshiba TG01 had it, and the HD2 had a (buggy) implementation hacked in. Issue is that any client devices will need their own external power source, because these phones aren't giving out any juice on their USB ports. So even if software support is added, if you have to attach a Y-cable and an AC adapter to plug in a keyboard (or lug around an extra set of batteries), then what's the point?
Also, most of the point of USB Host support is to be able to interface with external file storage, which is useless with WP7, or external devices-- also useless, as WP7 has no APIs to allow for apps to interface with such hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
amb9800 said:
Not sure why this is just getting reposted around the web without question. A/V out over USB? Out to what? Nothing takes an audio/video input signal over USB-- it's not a video cable.
You can use the bus to transfer files or other data using your own protocols over USB, but USB 2.0 does not have enough bandwidth for (uncompressed) HD video output. If you send it compressed (presumably just in the original video format, as these phones are not powerful enough to transcode on the fly), then you're essentially just using the phone as a USB flash drive and thus would need a receiver (externally-powered) that can process the file and actually output the video. A simple MicroUSB port is not going to be able to output anything directly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well if you read reports, they are already using this at redmond for presentations so it must work somehow.
nrfitchett4 said:
well if you read reports, they are already using this at redmond for presentations so it must work somehow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does. The Droid Incredible has been using it since it was released.
amb9800 said:
Not sure why this is just getting reposted around the web without question. A/V out over USB? Out to what? Nothing takes an audio/video input signal over USB-- it's not a video cable.
You can use the bus to transfer files or other data using your own protocols over USB, but USB 2.0 does not have enough bandwidth for (uncompressed) HD video output. If you send it compressed (presumably just in the original video format, as these phones are not powerful enough to transcode on the fly), then you're essentially just using the phone as a USB flash drive and thus would need a receiver (externally-powered) that can process the file and actually output the video. A simple MicroUSB port is not going to be able to output anything directly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Galaxy S supports micro-USB to HDMI interface.
EDIT: I guess you can scratch that, just checked with Samsung the earlier announced micro-USB to HDMI cable is no longer available, and the TV-Out currently supported is via headphone jack to RCA input on your TV, bummer...
MartyLK said:
It does. The Droid Incredible has been using it since it was released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a specific hardware feature of the Droid Incredible (the cable does nothing when plugged into any other HTC device), and it outputs through composite (NTSC- roughly VGA), not an HD signal.
I was thinking about this and I'm actually pretty excited about it. Sitting in the car waiting for the kids after school I could watch netflix on my stereo's 7inch screen, or at work, I could plug it into the breakroom tv to watch movies, etc.
I hope this gets added.
amb9800 said:
That's a specific hardware feature of the Droid Incredible (the cable does nothing when plugged into any other HTC device), and it outputs through composite (NTSC- roughly VGA), not an HD signal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The point being made is that WP7 devices can output an A/V signal from the microUSB port. That's all that is being said. Someone said the USB port could not output an A/V signal. The Droid Incredible was mentioned because it does output an A/V signal through its USB port.
MartyLK said:
The point being made is that WP7 devices can output an A/V signal from the microUSB port. That's all that is being said. Someone said the USB port could not output an A/V signal. The Droid Incredible was mentioned because it does output an A/V signal through its USB port.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A model-specific proprietary use of USB pins for a composite video signal through a custom cable/port design is very different from Microsoft suddenly being able to enable A/V out on standard MicroUSB ports in WP7 phones on an OS level.
amb9800 said:
A model-specific proprietary use of USB pins for a composite video signal through a custom cable/port design is very different from Microsoft suddenly being able to enable A/V out on standard MicroUSB ports in WP7 phones on an OS level.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you ever consider the port might not be standard? I think MS can do pretty much what they want. They are the masters of this stuff.
Thats pretty nifty there buddy =]
Hi all,
I think it's safe to say we all hate the 30 pin proprietary connectors on devices like the ipad.
My only concern is, how capable will the USB port on the xoom be. My immediate requirement would be Audio-in.
Do you think I may EVENTUALLY be able to connect a USB-based audio interface (for example: the Griffin iMIC ), once USB support on xoom improves?
I'm already disappointed that we can't charge over USB. I just hate to think that our only accessories will be the CRAPPY portfolio case and dock. Accessories matter.
orcad007 said:
Hi all,
I think it's safe to say we all hate the 30 pin proprietary connectors on devices like the ipad.
My only concern is, how capable will the USB port on the xoom be. My immediate requirement would be Audio-in.
Do you think I may EVENTUALLY be able to connect a USB-based audio interface (for example: the Griffin iMIC ), once USB support on xoom improves?
I'm already disappointed that we can't charge over USB. I just hate to think that our only accessories will be the CRAPPY portfolio case and dock. Accessories matter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
USB charging is limited to 5v no matter what the connector (coming from a computer). Thats why you can't charge the i*ad over USB either. I think it made since to have 2 separate plugs so people don't get confused.
jdenman03 said:
USB charging is limited to 5v no matter what the connector (coming from a computer). Thats why you can't charge the i*ad over USB either. I think it made since to have 2 separate plugs so people don't get confused.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually The i*ad does charge on 5 volt, it is the current that is the problem. Most devices (laptops) can not provide the current required.... I have a 2amp 5volt USB charger that I use to use with my i*ad. Would love to use it with the Zoom....
I think it might have audio out via USB cause while docked on the Moto dock there is a headphone out. The only connections to the Xoom are USB and two pins presumably for charging.
This is interesting. Basically this guy is saying USB-C doesn't support proprietary charging above 5 volts which is why Google didn't use Quick Charge for the Nexus 6P.
Maybe this is also why Samsung didn't use USB-C because they wanted to safely use Quick Charge?
http://phandroid.com/2016/04/21/lg-g5-htc-10-usb-type-c/
This is going to be posted all over and its basically nonsense. The current QC 2.0 over micro usb are also using 9-12volts. And micro usb also only supports 5v. So. It's no different then it's ever been.
Get a QC3.0 compatible charger/cable and be done.
regalpimpin said:
This is going to be posted all over and its basically nonsense. The current QC 2.0 over micro usb are also using 9-12volts. And micro usb also only supports 5v. So. It's no different then it's ever been.
Get a QC3.0 compatible charger/cable and be done.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quoted for truth.
Quickcharge checks before sending down higher voltages. It's fully backwards compatible even if it's not part of the USB specs. There is no additional danger from what you had before.
I follow
https://plus.google.com/+BensonLeung/posts
for his tested products and I think everyone will be fine.
Qualcomm has a list as well
https://www.qualcomm.com/documents/q...ge-device-list
chazall1 said:
I follow
https://plus.google.com/+BensonLeung/posts
for his tested products and I think everyone will be fine.
Qualcomm has a list as well
https://www.qualcomm.com/documents/q...ge-device-list
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Qualcomm link isn't working.
jsaxon2 said:
Qualcomm link isn't working.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://www.qualcomm.com/documents/quick-charge-device-list
This is total BS!!
I have the HTC 10 in my hands, it is quick charging with no issues.
Also, take the Apple Macbook as an example, the laptop uses an USB-C port to charge, it inputs 14.5V with 2A.
If the USB-C meets the USB-Power-Delivery standard, it can transfer up to 100W of power. Don't believe the BS article.
Edit: It seems that Qualcomm uses their own implementation, but still it is transferring voltage over 5 volts
Is the article supposed to say that not all USB-C cables can support it? Maybe the cheap ones can't?
Didn't Amazon just yank a bunch of cheaply made USB-C cables from their marketplace?
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Here's my take. I have always been under the impression the device dictates the watts and volts not the charger. The charger has a range it will draw power, and the phone tells the charger how much it needs. QC standard is UP TO and is not absolute. So if the device tells the charger I want 15W/5V that's what it'll get.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
I've been trying to research and I have come up with a conclusion. This is only my opinion, but I have based it off of hours of research. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Is QC QuickCharge 3.0 charger going to hurt my phone or anyy other devices I may plug into it?
Best I can figure is no. QC 3.0 chargers are designed to only fast charge if it is connected to a QC 3.0 device. Before it starts fast charging, it does a negotiation withh the device to verify if it supports QC 3.0. "Also, since Quick Charge is compatible and interoperable, a certified adapter can be used with a non-Quick Charge device, though the fast charging benefits of Quick Charge will not be available. " : Source
Can my HTC 10 be charged qith a non QC 3.0 charger?
The simple answer is yes. If you use one of the many non-QC 3.0 chargers that you have laying around, it will charge your phone just fine. This is as long as you use a compliant cable with the 56k ohm resistor. More on that next.
Does it matter which USB cable I use?
This one is tricky. I do not have an HTC 10 yet, but I have heard that it comes with a USB 2.0 Type A to USB 3.0 Type C cable. I can't find the source now, but it was in the Mega Thread. If this is true, than you should be able to use any cable this spec or better. By better I mean a USB 3.0 Type A to USB 3.1 Type 3 cable should work fine. The most important part is that the USB cable MUST have a 56k ohm resister. There have been some cheap cables using a 10k ohm resister that could cause problems. These problems could result in the port on the device or the charger getting damaged.
Will the HTC 10 work with a USB-PD charger?
Well first, USB-PD stands for USB-Power Delivery. This is the new USB fast charging standard set by the USB gods. This technology allows devices to receive more power and thus would allow a phone to charge more quickly. This is NOT the same as QC 3.0. QC 3.0 is a proprietary charging system and only available on certain Qualcomm powered devices. So can the HTC 10 use USB-PD? My guess is no but I could be wrong. According to GSMArena, the HTC 10 has aa USB 3.1 port. USB 3.1 supports USB-PD for quick charging. This would lead me to beleive that the HTC 10 supports both methods of fast charging. Unfortunately, I have been unable to find anywhere on HTC's site that specifies what the USB port actually is. My guess is that it is USB 3.1 compatible but not USB 3.1 compliant. by USB 3.1 compatible I am saying it will do everything that a compliant port will do except the USB-PD charging. We actually know that the port is not USB 3.1 compliant as the USB standard does not allow the method of fast charging that QC 3.0 utilizes.
I hope this helps to clear some things up. Once again I am no expert, but this is the way it appears to work as far as I can tell. If there is anything that I have wrong, please let us know and I can change it.
Thanks
jsaxon2 said:
I've been trying to research and I have come up with a conclusion. This is only my opinion, but I have based it off of hours of research. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Is QC QuickCharge 3.0 charger going to hurt my phone or anyy other devices I may plug into it?
Best I can figure is no. QC 3.0 chargers are designed to only fast charge if it is connected to a QC 3.0 device. Before it starts fast charging, it does a negotiation withh the device to verify if it supports QC 3.0. "Also, since Quick Charge is compatible and interoperable, a certified adapter can be used with a non-Quick Charge device, though the fast charging benefits of Quick Charge will not be available. " : Source
Can my HTC 10 be charged qith a non QC 3.0 charger?
The simple answer is yes. If you use one of the many non-QC 3.0 chargers that you have laying around, it will charge your phone just fine. This is as long as you use a compliant cable with the 56k ohm resistor. More on that next.
Does it matter which USB cable I use?
This one is tricky. I do not have an HTC 10 yet, but I have heard that it comes with a USB 2.0 Type A to USB 3.0 Type C cable. I can't find the source now, but it was in the Mega Thread. If this is true, than you should be able to use any cable this spec or better. By better I mean a USB 3.0 Type A to USB 3.1 Type 3 cable should work fine. The most important part is that the USB cable MUST have a 56k ohm resister. There have been some cheap cables using a 10k ohm resister that could cause problems. These problems could result in the port on the device or the charger getting damaged.
Will the HTC 10 work with a USB-PD charger?
Well first, USB-PD stands for USB-Power Delivery. This is the new USB fast charging standard set by the USB gods. This technology allows devices to receive more power and thus would allow a phone to charge more quickly. This is NOT the same as QC 3.0. QC 3.0 is a proprietary charging system and only available on certain Qualcomm powered devices. So can the HTC 10 use USB-PD? My guess is no but I could be wrong. According to GSMArena, the HTC 10 has aa USB 3.1 port. USB 3.1 supports USB-PD for quick charging. This would lead me to beleive that the HTC 10 supports both methods of fast charging. Unfortunately, I have been unable to find anywhere on HTC's site that specifies what the USB port actually is. My guess is that it is USB 3.1 compatible but not USB 3.1 compliant. by USB 3.1 compatible I am saying it will do everything that a compliant port will do except the USB-PD charging. We actually know that the port is not USB 3.1 compliant as the USB standard does not allow the method of fast charging that QC 3.0 utilizes.
I hope this helps to clear some things up. Once again I am no expert, but this is the way it appears to work as far as I can tell. If there is anything that I have wrong, please let us know and I can change it.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it is compliant.... This is why USB 2.0 devices were able to have quick charging. The type C port is no different.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8539/...ard-device-class-v10-specifications-finalized
Version 3.1 now supports 5 V, 12 V, and 20 V on the pins to allow the higher power output without excessive current, but even the current has been increased to a maximum of 5 A which is much higher than before.
The HTC 10 does support 3.1 as their tech page says it support USB 3.1 gen 1
http://www.htc.com/us/go/buy-htc-10/#unlocked
Buttons Keys and Connection Ports
3.5 mm stereo audio jack, USB 3.1 Gen 1, Type-C, Capacitive keys
---------- Post added at 03:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:19 PM ----------
I wanted to add if you are part of the Elevate program you can see the white papers and it shows it is USB 3.1 Gen 1 type-c
If someone wants to host the file I will gladly upload it.
Tidbits said:
Yes it is compliant.... This is why USB 2.0 devices were able to have quick charging. The type C port is no different.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8539/...ard-device-class-v10-specifications-finalized
Version 3.1 now supports 5 V, 12 V, and 20 V on the pins to allow the higher power output without excessive current, but even the current has been increased to a maximum of 5 A which is much higher than before.
The HTC 10 does support 3.1 as their tech page says it support USB 3.1 gen 1
http://www.htc.com/us/go/buy-htc-10/#unlocked
Buttons Keys and Connection Ports
3.5 mm stereo audio jack, USB 3.1 Gen 1, Type-C, Capacitive keys
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your kinda missing the point. The the HTC 10 is NOT compliant. It goes against the USB-C spec, "These, and any charger you see that supports QC3.0 over USB Type-C, might be QC3.0 certified but they're not following the USB-C spec." Source. If you are not following the spec, you are not compliant. You can be compatible without being compliant. Anyway, I don't care if you want to call it compliant or not. What I am getting at is that it most likely does not support the USB Power Delivery for fast charge. And if it does not support USB-PD, than it is not a USB 3.1 compliant port. USB 3.1 standard includes USB-PD Source. So the HTC whitepapers say it is a USB 3.1 port. That is great. If it does USB-PD fast charging, than that would be awesome.
jsaxon2 said:
Your kinda missing the point. The the HTC 10 is NOT compliant. It goes against the USB-C spec, "These, and any charger you see that supports QC3.0 over USB Type-C, might be QC3.0 certified but they're not following the USB-C spec." Source. If you are not following the spec, you are not compliant. You can be compatible without being compliant. Anyway, I don't care if you want to call it compliant or not. What I am getting at is that it most likely does not support the USB Power Delivery for fast charge. And if it does not support USB-PD, than it is not a USB 3.1 compliant port. USB 3.1 standard includes USB-PD Source. So the HTC whitepapers say it is a USB 3.1 port. That is great. If it does USB-PD fast charging, than that would be awesome.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benson assumes it isn't compliant because
1. He doesn't have the device.
2. He can't find what USB port is being used
So since he can't find this information that he can't recommend something is on the basis that he doesn't want to approve something because he doesn't know. I bet if he saw the information I just showed and he sees the white paper he'll change what he said.
Why would it not be compliant when USB 2.0 devices can charge using the exact same voltage yet a 3.1 port can't? Think about it for a minute. It would be cheaper if they were not compliant to NOT use, and not give a QC 3.0 charger... Much like Google did with the 5X and 6P probably to save on costs.
Tidbits said:
Benson assumes it isn't compliant because
1. He doesn't have the device.
2. He can't find what USB port is being used
So since he can't find this information that he can't recommend something is on the basis that he doesn't want to approve something because he doesn't know. I bet if he saw the information I just showed and he sees the white paper he'll change what he said.
Why would it not be compliant when USB 2.0 devices can charge using the exact same voltage yet a 3.1 port can't? Think about it for a minute. It would be cheaper if they were not compliant to NOT use, and not give a QC 3.0 charger... Much like Google did with the 5X and 6P probably to save on costs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, I wait for him to get the device then. You still can't be compliant and break the rules though. You can be compatible though. As for the 5x and 6p, they support the USB-PD fast charging. This kept google with the USB standard. HTC chose to go with the QC 3.0 proprietary solution most likely because it works better. QC 3.0 only has to work with select QC devices and therefore can be tailored to exactly what they need. USB-PD will have to work across multiple device types from multiple manufacturers. This leaves room for inefficiencies. That would be my opinion.
jsaxon2 said:
Okay, I wait for him to get the device then. You still can't be compliant and break the rules though. You can be compatible though. As for the 5x and 6p, they support the USB-PD fast charging. This kept google with the USB standard. HTC chose to go with the QC 3.0 proprietary solution most likely because it works better. QC 3.0 only has to work with select QC devices and therefore can be tailored to exactly what they need. USB-PD will have to work across multiple device types from multiple manufacturers. This leaves room for inefficiencies. That would be my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That shows to me it doesn't support USB-PD 2.0 which supports up to 20V to the pins
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8539/u...ions-finalized
When USB was first introduced, the thought was that it would be primarily a data interface, with a limited amount of power delivery which was generally used to power the electronics of certain devices. The initial specification for USB only had provisions for 0.75 watts of power – 150 mA at 5 V. USB 2.0 bumped that to 500 mA, or 2.5 watts, and USB 3.0 specified 900 mA at 5 V, or 4.5 watts. All of these specifications allow for power as well as data transmission at the same time. In addition, there was also a Battery Charging specification which allows up to 1.5 A at 5 V for a maximum of 7.5 watts of power but with no data transmission available. The jump from 7.5 watts to 100 watts of the new specification is a huge increase, and one that cannot be done with just an amperage increase on the system as was done in the previous versions of USB. Version 3.1 now supports 5 V, 12 V, and 20 V on the pins to allow the higher power output without excessive current, but even the current has been increased to a maximum of 5 A which is much higher than before.
That right there makes it possible for QC 3.0 to happy while staying PD 2.0 compliant.
Tidbits said:
That shows to me it doesn't support USB-PD 2.0 which supports up to 20V to the pins
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8539/u...ions-finalized
When USB was first introduced, the thought was that it would be primarily a data interface, with a limited amount of power delivery which was generally used to power the electronics of certain devices. The initial specification for USB only had provisions for 0.75 watts of power â?? 150 mA at 5 V. USB 2.0 bumped that to 500 mA, or 2.5 watts, and USB 3.0 specified 900 mA at 5 V, or 4.5 watts. All of these specifications allow for power as well as data transmission at the same time. In addition, there was also a Battery Charging specification which allows up to 1.5 A at 5 V for a maximum of 7.5 watts of power but with no data transmission available. The jump from 7.5 watts to 100 watts of the new specification is a huge increase, and one that cannot be done with just an amperage increase on the system as was done in the previous versions of USB. Version 3.1 now supports 5 V, 12 V, and 20 V on the pins to allow the higher power output without excessive current, but even the current has been increased to a maximum of 5 A which is much higher than before.
That right there makes it possible for QC 3.0 to happy while staying PD 2.0 compliant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everything you posted is usb-pd specs. I agree. The difference is that qc 3.0 uses the data pins as well where usb-pd does not. They are two different approaches to achieving a common goal. While QC 3.0 does not apply more power than the spec allows, is does supply the power in a way that goes against the spec.
jsaxon2 said:
Everything you posted is usb-pd specs. I agree. The difference is that qc 3.0 uses the data pins as well where usb-pd does not. They are two different approaches to achieving a common goal. While QC 3.0 does not apply more power than the spec allows, is does supply the power in a way that goes against the spec.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have the papers showing this? I haven't seen anything that says it goes through the data channels.
Either way the fact that PD2.0 rates 20V debunks the cable or connector can only handle 5V arguments.
I'm not sure if it was said but USB 3.1 =/= USB 3.1 Gen 1.
Especially in response to "The HTC 10 does support 3.1 as their tech page says it support USB 3.1 gen 1"
USB 3.1 with it's 10Gbit/s speed along other specs, features etc. was originally called USB 3.1.
USB 3.0 with it's 5Gbit/s speed along other specs, features etc. was originally called USB 3.0.
USB 3.0 =/= USB 3.1
Got that?
USB 3.0 > USB 3.1 Gen 1
USB 3.1 > USB 3.1 Gen 2
Why? Because retards.
Also marketing wankers. "Looky looky, our product has USB 3.1 Gen 1 which means it's better than USB 3.0."
Same story happened with LTE and 4G. Carriers/ISP's begged/forced the 3GPP to allow them to call LTE as 4G when LTE-Advanced is what 4G is.. LTE is more like 3.9G
And if I'm not mistaken, you Americans also had 3G HSPA+ disguised as 4G when it's actually 3.75G? And when LTE rolled out they just called it LTE.
tl;dr? HTC 10 has a USB 3.1 Gen 1 port or in other words USB 3.0.
lagittaja said:
I'm not sure if it was said but USB 3.1 =/= USB 3.1 Gen 1.
Especially in response to "The HTC 10 does support 3.1 as their tech page says it support USB 3.1 gen 1"
USB 3.1 with it's 10Gbit/s speed along other specs, features etc. was originally called USB 3.1.
USB 3.0 with it's 5Gbit/s speed along other specs, features etc. was originally called USB 3.0.
USB 3.0 =/= USB 3.1
Got that?
USB 3.0 > USB 3.1 Gen 1
USB 3.1 > USB 3.1 Gen 2
Why? Because retards.
Also marketing wankers. "Looky looky, our product has USB 3.1 Gen 1 which means it's better than USB 3.0."
Same story happened with LTE and 4G. Carriers/ISP's begged/forced the 3GPP to allow them to call LTE as 4G when LTE-Advanced is what 4G is.. LTE is more like 3.9G
And if I'm not mistaken, you Americans also had 3G HSPA+ disguised as 4G when it's actually 3.75G? And when LTE rolled out they just called it LTE.
tl;dr? HTC 10 has a USB 3.1 Gen 1 port or in other words USB 3.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
USB 3.1 gen 1 only works with type C connectors on eqch end to get those speeds. That's why you don't see USB 3.0 type C cables or USB 3.1 A to C cables.
My laptop makes that distinction as well. All my ports are 3.0, but my type C ports are USB 3.1 gen 2.
Even Monoprice for example. All their C to C are 3.1, but as soon as one is a different connector they are all 3.0.
http://www.monoprice.com/pages/usb_31_type_c
Of course this is my understanding and what my laptop maker explained to me.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Tidbits said:
USB 3.1 gen 1 only works with type C connectors on eqch end to get those speeds. That's why you don't see USB 3.0 type C cables or USB 3.1 A to C cables.
My laptop makes that distinction as well. All my ports are 3.0, but my type C ports are USB 3.1 gen 2.
Even Monoprice for example. All their C to C are 3.1, but as soon as one is a different connector they are all 3.0.
http://www.monoprice.com/pages/usb_31_type_c
Of course this is my understanding and what my laptop maker explained to me.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The USB spec etcetera is a deep rabbit hole and the renaming of USB 3.0 didn't help things at all.
You don't need type C-C cable for USB 3.1 Gen 1. USB 3.1 Gen 1 is what we used to know as USB 3.0. You can have USB 3.0 or USB 3.1 Gen 1 with USB A-A or A-microB (the weird 3.0 micro) or A-B or A-C or C-C or whatever the variation you can think of.
The reason you don't see USB 3.0 C-C cables is because chicken and the egg. The original USB 3.0 spec was released before the type C..
Type C was developed at the same time as the now finalized USB 3.1 spec, which absorbed the original USB 3.0 spec as USB 3.1 Gen 1 and the USB 3.1 we knew before is now known as USB 3.1 Gen 2, and was (C spec) released alongside the USB 3.1 spec which it supplements.
No USB 3.1 A-C cables? Ahem. http://www.belkin.com/us/p/P-F2CU029/
Also, just please try and forget the USB x.x with the type C.
Type C is type C. It is a physical connector, it's a cable/connector standard.
Just like mini B or micro B or B or A for that matter..
USB x.x is a technology standard.
USB-PD is a technology standard.
They are not the same thing.
They are not dependent on each other.
In other words, you can have type C with USB 2.0 if you so wish, look at the Nexus 5X and 6P..
http://www.usb.org/developers/usbty...ge_Product_and_Packaging_Guidelines_FINAL.pdf
Please note the following:
USB Type-C™ is not USB 3.1
The USB Type-C™ cable and connector specification is a supplement to the USB 3.1 specification, however USB Type-C™ is not USB 3.1.
These terms are not interchangeable.
USB Type-C™ is not USB Power Delivery
USB Power Delivery is a protocol/hardware solution that increases USB power capabilities up to 100W.
These terms are not interchangeable.
If a product features USB Type-C™ it does not necessarily support USB Power Delivery and/or USB 3.1
Device manufacturers can choose to support USB Power Delivery and/or USB 3.1 performance but it is not required for USB Type-C™ products
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good afternoon,
possibly should already be several topics with this topic, but I can not see if there is the possibility to be able to connect via cable to a gamepad tablet while an external battery .
Does someone can help me ?
Thank you
Game Pads have AFAIK no driver support in Android, except if they can emulate a mouse or keyboard. With a kb emulation or mouse and kb combined, it could well work, theoretically.
But no charging at the same time. Older Notes with their custom port could do such. USB3 offers not much relief, but USB-C could be perfect, with a dock. For the future.
Thanks for your response. so is there any dock that you think works?
Nope, that would have to be an "intelligent" dock with support by the Note's firmware, thus being an official Samsung peripheral. An Usb2 port can draw up to 0,5A during data transfer, but the Note does not charge when active and connected to a usb port, only in standby. Such an "intelligent dock" could charge at 2A while there's no data transfer and also provide MHL and more, but it never got invented...
OK thank you for the information. therefore anything done, even just buying another trablet .
Can you help me.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/31151540831...b019ab9ca05&bu=44419278023&cp=1&sojTags=bu=bu
this cable will works?
The seller tell me that will works.
Thanks
It looks interesting. I don't know how it will handle the charging matter. Probably the current is only run thru the hub while the Note is in standby. But anything else won't work anyway with the Note. I also don't know whether it will deliver 0,5 or 2A and whether you have to remove all attached usb devices first. There must be some logic to switch between data transmission and charge mode and best such is controlled by the Note, but that would have been Samsungs job,to provide something like Microsoft's Continuum. But i'm not sure whether the Continuum adapter can charge the device. This is probably a huge weak point of that concept.
I know this is gonna be quite a niche scenario but I'm at wit's end here and I wanted to see if there was anyone else out there who is/has struggled with this: I want to use a more power-delivery capable USB-C to USB-C cable to connect my S20+5G (Snapdragon, Verizon if relevant) to my computer (has to be the USB-C port, for various reasons) for the purposes of a USB-tethered internet connection. Has anyone found a cable other than the exact one that comes in the box that's able to consistently (i.e. no random disconnects, no "USB connect/disconnect chime") hold a connection? My entire internet connectivity (due to my location) is dependent on this so that's why the whole "no disconnect" thing is a big deal.
I've tried a multitude of cables that *should* be upgrades to the stock one off of Amazon (from decent manufacturers i.e. Amazon Basics, CableMatters etc.) but even if they deliver power more efficiently or transfer files faster or whatever, the main thing I need out of them is their tethering consistency, which they ALWAYS fall short of compared to the black "came with the phone" 3 ft. cable. These "higher material grade/better quality" cables will always inevitably kill my connection within anywhere from 10 seconds to 5 minutes of the start of connectivity.
The stock cable provides the type of connectivity I need, however I have no idea what the exact specs are for it but I'm fairly certain they aren't optimal; i.e. while my phone is tethered, the battery can't charge faster than the rate at which it's using power to do the tethering, so if I leave it connected long enough, the phone will die even though it's getting "charged" by the computer. For reference I believe the phone's USB-C port is USB 3.2 while my computer's port is USB 3.1 gen 2 and I don't think the stock cable reaches either of these standards. I've tried looking on the Samsung website but only find the exact cable I already have. Is there a better "official" version of this cable available somewhere? Or any non-official ones that are confirmed to hold the connection like the stock one?
Thanks in advance.
As an alternative, have you considered Ethernet tethering? It simplifies both the logistics of charging and maintaining a reliable data connection.
I would if I could but due to the aforementioned complete dependence on my cell data for our internet service, I have to use some...creative workarounds regarding hotspot data limits and unfortunately it can only be done through USB tethering
Interesting. How are you working around hotspot data limits? I'm curious about this, and wonder why you couldn't do something similar for Ethernet.
BTW, I use this with my phone:
Anker 543 USB-C Hub (6-in-1, Slim)
The Anker Advantage: Join the 55 million+ powered by our leading technology. Massive Expansion: Equipped with a Power Delivery input port, an HDMI port, an Ethernet port, a USB-C data port, and 2 USB data ports. Powerful Pass-Through Charging: Connect a 65W wall charger to the Power Delivery...
us.anker.com
It accepts USB PD input and when paired with a Samsung 45W charger and its stock cable, does a great job at quickly charging my phone even when using DeX over HDMI or powering USB hard disks, etc. And the Ethernet link is rock solid. For reference, I am running DUJ on a SM-G986B.