If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
FYI - follow up to my old thread micro-USB problem
FYI - OK, I found out more about the micro-USB connectors. I talked
with LG Electronics Service department about the problem I had. The smartphone I have has a micro-USB size B port. The Canon digital camera has a size A port and therefore are not compatible with each other. The LG rep also noted that some of their newer smartphones will have a micro-USB size C port. With regard to the cable to use, none of them will fit that of the others. So the long and short is that I will have to read the fine print a lot more closely rather than assuming that just because it's "micro-USB" that one cable will fit that of another. I made a bad assumption that they maintained backward compatibility like the standard size USB ports. I mean, you can plug the connectors for USB 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 into each other even though the capabilities of each have changed over time. My bad :-( So, thanks everyone for your comments. The mystery (to me) has been cleared. It was not a conspiracy. They simply changed the design specs :-) John |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
FYI - follow up to my old thread micro-USB problem
On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 20:44:27 -0000 (UTC), "Yes" wrote:
| FYI - OK, I found out more about the micro-USB connectors. I talked | with LG Electronics Service department about the problem I had. The | smartphone I have has a micro-USB size B port. The Canon digital | camera has a size A port and therefore are not compatible with each | other. The LG rep also noted that some of their newer smartphones will | have a micro-USB size C port. With regard to the cable to use, none of | them will fit that of the others. | | So the long and short is that I will have to read the fine print a lot | more closely rather than assuming that just because it's "micro-USB" | that one cable will fit that of another. I made a bad assumption that | they maintained backward compatibility like the standard size USB | ports. I mean, you can plug the connectors for USB 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 | into each other even though the capabilities of each have changed over | time. My bad :-( | | So, thanks everyone for your comments. The mystery (to me) has been | cleared. It was not a conspiracy. They simply changed the design | specs :-) | | John I suspect many devices with USB ports will be moving to C. My phone has that type. I like it because there's no bottom/top difference and I can plug the cable in without having to put on reading glasses to check for precise positioning. Larc |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
FYI - follow up to my old thread micro-USB problem
Larc wrote:
-- snipped -- I suspect many devices with USB ports will be moving to C. My phone has that type. I like it because there's no bottom/top difference and I can plug the cable in without having to put on reading glasses to check for precise positioning. Larc definitely agree. Now I'll have to start researching OTG capabilities out there; just heard about that a day or two ago. I don't think my phone (LG Aristo) has that capability, but a call to LG should clear that question up for me. I'm several years behind the times here. Started having fun watching some YouTube videos showing how some people are using OTG with their phones. Looks interesting. But I remain biased to desktops. There's just something about having a full-fledged keyboard, monitor, mouse and hardware flexibility that having a desktop offers. Not to mention the satisfaction in putting it together. John |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
FYI - follow up to my old thread micro-USB problem
Yes wrote:
Larc wrote: -- snipped -- I suspect many devices with USB ports will be moving to C. My phone has that type. I like it because there's no bottom/top difference and I can plug the cable in without having to put on reading glasses to check for precise positioning. Larc definitely agree. Now I'll have to start researching OTG capabilities out there; just heard about that a day or two ago. I don't think my phone (LG Aristo) has that capability, but a call to LG should clear that question up for me. I'm several years behind the times here. Started having fun watching some YouTube videos showing how some people are using OTG with their phones. Looks interesting. But I remain biased to desktops. There's just something about having a full-fledged keyboard, monitor, mouse and hardware flexibility that having a desktop offers. Not to mention the satisfaction in putting it together. John The connectors have sizes. You can have a desktop computer with regular sized connectors. You can have other devices with microUSB. But in addition to that, the USB scheme started with the notion of gender for the cable. "What is the Difference between USB Type A and USB Type B Plug/Connector" http://digital.ni.com/public.nsf/all...256DB8006208DE Peripherals used a different connector shape than the host did. This ensured that extension cables were fitted the right way. This scheme also had one other purpose. USB did not support host to host, so peer devices (two Type A) were never intended to connect to one another. That was their thought back when USB was invented. How did that change ? USB OTG was invented. It allowed host devices to have a "dual personality". One OTG device could decide to work as a peripheral, the other could be the host. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_On-The-Go A second violation of the original intent, was the USB laplink cable. It was Type A on both ends. The chip located in the center of the chip, originally didn't have a USB class defined for it. That was remedied later by USB.org . The chip is basically a two-direction FIFO mailbox scheme. A host on one end, shoves a packet into a FIFO. The other host computer, thinks when it sees a packet sitting in the FIFO, that it's "reading a peripheral". The feelings of neither computer is hurt by this subterfuge. And software stacks were written for file transfer and networking, across that link. The end result of some of these changes, is the home user plays the role of "engineer", reading all the specs, and figuring out exactly how many ways there are to plug stuff together :-( USB type C has changed the philosophy again, and there are even cables with a chip embedded in the cable, to make the cable intelligent. If you're wondering why the cable has a "finger hold", the chip is hiding in there. The ugly cable design wasn't a fashion statement. https://www.cnet.com/how-to/usb-type...nect-them-all/ "With Type-C, both ends of a USB cable are the same, allowing for reversible plug orientation. You also don't need to worry about plugging it in upside down as it will function both ways." To do that, the smaller connector invented, has more contacts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C "Cables USB-C 3.1 cables are considered full-featured USB-C cables. They are electronically marked cables that contain a chip with an ID function based on the configuration channel and vendor-defined messages (VDM) from the USB Power Delivery 2.0 specification." See how easy ? :-/ "why is smoke coming out of this cable?" "it's intelligent smoke" Paul |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Micro SD card / MSP430 interface: write problem | Christophe Braillon | Storage & Hardrives | 0 | November 7th 09 05:42 PM |
Problem with Cruzer Micro... | NewMan | Storage (alternative) | 7 | September 11th 07 10:51 PM |
Problem with Planet Micro | Bert | UK Computer Vendors | 0 | March 10th 06 09:00 PM |
P4 system problem from hell, follow-up | Lou Grinzo | Homebuilt PC's | 1 | December 1st 04 05:28 PM |
Sandisk Cruzer Micro flash drives - problem | Dave | General | 0 | September 11th 04 05:45 PM |