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

    I still don’t think USB-C is a viable replacement for USB-A for lots of uses, it’s just so fragile. I have so many messed up usb c things and I can’t remember ever damaging a usb a connector in a way that mattered.

    • teft@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The cables are more fragile on USB C in order to save the ports. The opposite was true for USB A. Basically if something hits an A connector the cable was sturdy enough to transfer the force to the port and damage it. With C you just have to replace the cable.

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

        That makes sense in theory, but as with the cables, I’ve seen way more damaged usb c ports than usb a ports. In fact I can’t really think of any time I’ve ever seen a usb a port damaged to a point it didn’t work

      • rglullisOPA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Are you sure? Because I have a couple of older phones that were USB-C and their port was the first thing to fail…

        • teft@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I can’t speak to every manufacturer but that is part of the logic of the redesign i remember reading about.