Using a radios USB charging socket

[JohnD]

Taken advantage of the capability.

It is not misuse.

 

[ericmark]

I thought we had left the EU?

 

[JohnD]

The EU has both the power and the will to protect its consumers and the environment.

Even Apple will comply.

UK has to trade in the same world, and will align to common standards, even though it gave up its vote and its right to contribute to forming them,

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

It was never intended to be a way to power the entire peripheral or to charge batteries in devices. But manufacturers corrupted the use of the USB port.

Well actually, member companies in the USB-IF collectively stated their desire to make the standard more useful by allowing charging. The USB-IF responded first of all by developing the Battery Charging standard, later BC1.2, and also an ECN which allowing some exceptions to the power draw limit on first connection. They then started work on the Power Delivery specification part of USB, followed by the EPR version of Power Delivery which allows up to 240W and 48V through the Type-C connector. This was an industry wide agreement and not a corruption. Although it may have been pushed by the fact that it would have happened anyway but in a dozen different vendor specific versions.

 

[JohnW2]

It was never intended to be a way to power the entire peripheral or to charge batteries in devices. But manufacturers corrupted the use of the USB port.

That's probably true, but the thinking of those who create the USB specifications has presumably changed, given the power-supplying capabilities of USB-C ?

Edit: Apologies - I hadn't seen Detlef's post when I posted this!

Kind Regards, John

 

[Why Not Indeed]

the Universal Serial Bus ( Serial Data ) has been corrupted by several manufacturers. The EU and Governments has taken advantage. of this mis-use

That's a peculiarly negative way of looking at it. Consumers wanted it, manufacturers supplied it, nobody is disadvantaged by it.
I have no idea what the "governments taking advantage" bit means.

 

[bernardgreen]

USB-C connections have 24 pins but only 12 circuit connections. Each circuit connects to 2 pins. Allows the user to put the plug into the item either way round.

Very different to the USB concept.

 

[mcprinter]

A male to male USB cable is not permitted by the USB Specification, and is a good way to destroy your electrical equipment.
(Referring only to type-A and type B of course)

Probably more accurate to say a type-A to type-A (male or female at each end) or a type-B to type-B (male or female at each end) is not permitted.

I use A male to A male for a touchscreen my company supports. Used for touch data.
Not very common. First time I had come across it in my many years in IT.

USB2.0 Type A to Type A Cable - 99CDL2-012 | Cables Direct

The 99CDL2-012 range of USB 2.0 Type A to Type A data cables are for host to device applications. Please note this is not for host to host applications and may damage your equipment.

www.cablesdirect.co.uk

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

USB-C connections have 24 pins but only 12 circuit connections. Each circuit connects to 2 pins. Allows the user to put the plug into the item either way round.

Very different to the USB concept.

This is factually incorrect. Also the system is still backwards compatible to low speed USB so I don't see how it is different in concept. As said, it has developed as required by users and vendors, and it still performs its original goal. It it hadn't developed in line with people's expectations then it would have been abandoned in favour of a connector/system that did.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I use A male to A male for a touchscreen my company supports. Used for touch data.
Not very common. First time I had come across it in my many years in IT.

Male A to male A, to also plug a portable HDD caddy, into a computer.

I wonder if the OP's radio socket, might be to allow a USB stick to be plugged in, loaded with MP3's?

 

[bernardgreen]

This is factually incorrect. Also the system is still backwards compatible to low speed USB so I don't see how it is different in concept

How can a 24 pin connector mate with a 4 pin connector.

Data sheet for a Socket Type C USB Connector

https://docs.rs-online.com/ee0e/0900766b816e6645.pdf

​

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

How can a 24 pin connector mate with a 4 pin connector.

https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/technical-articles/introduction-to-usb-type-c-which-pins-power-delivery-data-transfer/

 

[JohnW2]

How can a 24 pin connector mate with a 4 pin connector.

I think you are perhaps being (uncharacteristically) a little silly, since you must understand that no-one believes, or has suggested, that connectors of different shapes/sizes/numbers of pins could mate together.

It was you who invoked the concept of USB, and Detlef was saying that, in terms of the initial concept (concerning data transfer), there is backwards compatibility of that concept.

Yes, the original concept of USB has been expanded, to encompass new functionality and uses, but the original concept of USB still remains.

Virtually everything technological (and some things which aren't technological) develop/evolve by adding additional (sometimes 'very different') functionality, but also retaining the original concept/functionality (mobile phones are a good example), but there's nothing wrong with that (provided it is done satisfactorily), is there?