• Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        We cannot have two standards, that’s ridiculous! We need to develop one universal standard that covers everyone’s use cases.

          • ABCDE@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Can it use others, and is there a benefit? USB C makes a lot of sense; lower material usage, small, carries data, power and connects to almost everything now.

            • BetaDoggo_@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              I believe USB-C is the only connector supported for carrying DisplayPort signals other than DisplayPort itself.

              The biggest issue with USB-C for display in my opinion is that cable specs vary so much. A cable with a type c end could carry anywhere from 60-10000MB/s and deliver anywhere from 5-240W. What’s worse is that most aren’t labeled, so even if you know what spec you need you’re going to have a hell of a time finding it in a pile of identical black cables.

              Not that I dislike USB-C. It’s a great connector, but the branding of USB has always been a mess.

              • strawberry@kbin.run
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                would be neat to somehow have a standard color coding. kinda how USB 3 is (usually) blue, maybe there could be thin bands of color on the connector?

                better yet, maybe some raised bumps so visually impaired people could feel what type it was. for example one dot is USB 2, two could be USB 3, etc

                • Flipper@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Have you looked at the naming of the usb standards? No you havn’t otherwise you wouldn’t make this sensible suggestion.

                  • strawberry@kbin.run
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    the shenenigans with USB 3 naming you mean? you’re right, this would be too logical for USB lol

              • cum@lemmy.cafe
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Yeah I have multiple USB cables, some at 30w, and some at 140w. Get them mixed up all the time! More companies need to at least brand the wattage on the connectors.

            • frezik@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              There’s some really high bandwidth stuff that USB-C isn’t rated for. You have to really press the limits, though. Something like 4k + 240Hz + HDR.

              • ABCDE@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 months ago

                That doesn’t even seem so unreasonable. Is that the limit though? My cable puts a gigabyte a second down it so I wouldn’t imagine that would hit the limit.

                • GeniusIsme@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  It is trivial arithmetic: 4.52403840*2160 ≈ 9 GB/ s. Not even close. Even worse, that cable will struggle to get ordinary 60hz 4k delivered.

                  • pirat@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    4.5 × 240 × 3840 × 2160 ≈ 9 GB/s

                    It seems markdown formatting ruined your numbers because of the asterisks. Whatever is written between two of those turns italic, so they’re not ideal for multiplication symbols here on Lemmy (or any other place that implements markdown formatting).

                  • ABCDE@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    I think the maths got a bit funky there. I don’t think a cable capable of such speeds would struggled to do 60Hz at 4K, it surely doesn’t need close to a gigabyte a second?

                • frezik@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  USB-C with Thunderbolt currently had a limit of 40Gbit/sec. Wikipedia has a table of what DisplayPort can do at that bandwidth:

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort

                  See the section “Resolution and refresh frequency limits”. The table there shows it’d be able to do 4k/144hz/10bpp just fine, but can’t keep above 60hz for 8k.

                  Its an uncompressed video signal, and that takes a lot of bandwidth. Though there is a simple lossless compression mode.

        • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          USB C seems like a good idea but in reality all it really did was take my 5 different, not interchangeable, but visually distinct, cables, and make them all look identical and require labeling

        • admiralteal@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I love having mysterious cables that may or may not do things I expect them to when plugged into ports that may or may not support the features I think they do.

          • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            If the implementation is so broad that I have to break out my label maker, can we even really call it a “standard”

        • Player2@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          USB C is just a connector, you might be referring to Displayport over USB C which is basically just the same standard with a different connector at the end. That or Thunderbolt I guess

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      As already mentioned, DisplayPort exists. The problem is adoption. Even getting DisplayPort adopted as the de facto standard for PC monitors hasn’t done anything to get it built into TVs.

        • Scrollone@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          DisplayPort supports CEC.

          From Wikipedia:

          The DisplayPort AUX channel is a half-duplex (bidirectional) data channel used for miscellaneous additional data beyond video and audio, such as EDID (I2C) or CEC commands.

          • wjrii@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            When you’re trying to get into DPs, the outside can be slippery and the screw part can be tight! Very dangerous for the workplace.