Hacker News

AFAIK that's just when plugging in a USB 3 device into a USB 2 port or using a USB 2 cable.

I wonder if it's possible for a regular machine with two high speed ports to do a cable test by itself. Maybe it can't test all the attributes but could it at least verify speed claims in software?

Even Apple now has one of those, when you plug something into the USB 2 port on the MacBook Neo.

I strongly suspected my old xps had nonstandard things going on with its USB C charger

That’s quite a simplistic one unfortunately - USB 2 and 3 use different controllers in the PC, which it can indeed detect. The sub-flavours of 3/4 less so.

I've used all manner of archaic usb cables for data transfer when in a pinch and windows has never shown me anything at all. Could it be the external device you were connecting to triggering the windows notification?

I have seen these kinds of notifications on occasion but they are far from the norm.

Oh, they very much do. But like with everything in technology, they can do fuck all about it, so they resign and maybe complain to you occasionally if you're the designated (in)voluntary tech support person for your family and friends.

Regular people hate technology, both for how magical and how badly broken it is, but they've long learned they're powerless to change it - nobody listens to their complaints, and the whole market is supply-driven, i.e. you get to choose from what vendors graciously put on the market, not from what the space of possible devices.

Nobody said the headphones needed USB 3. The point is that the cable is physically thick and rigid (like something you'd expect to carry serious data) but doesn't. Meanwhile Apple ships a thinner, more flexible cable that supports the same USB 2.0 speeds and equivalent power delivery. The cable B&W chose is worse ergonomically for no functional benefit. That's the kind of mismatch the Treedix exposes.

The point isn’t really about audio bandwidth; it’s about the cable being strangely overbuilt for what it actually does.

It’s rigid and thick, like a Thunderbolt 3 cable, yet only supports USB 2.0 speeds and fast charging for a device that doesn’t need fast charging.

Compare that to Apple’s iPhone USB-C cable which is thin, flexible, and supports the same features.

That matters because someone might grab that cable assuming it’s a “better cable”: it came with a £629 product, it’s thick and feels serious, so surely it’s capable. But it isn’t. And there’s nothing marked on it to tell you otherwise.

The whole system ends up relying on presumption, which is exactly the problem the device in the article is solving.

That's a cheap one. Some of the analyzers can go into 5 figures.

Don't forget the speeds at which modern serial interfaces go. Being able to look at the data, at that speed, requires some serious kit.

So much this. I have a few different categories of "known good" USB-C cables because one type doesn't fit all my use cases. Sometimes the trait I need is >100w PD charging at 1M. Sometimes I need 80 Gbps dual 4k video at 3M. Other times I need 40 Gbps .5M to a portable NVMe enclosure. USB-C cables I regularly rely on range from $5 to $100 and weight/size varies >3x.

And in my tiny 'go bike bag' for day trips I need one 2M cable that's thin, coils into a tight ball and weighs nothing yet will charge up to 45w and reliably xfer data at up to 5Gbps (USB 3.1) for quick uploads with optional USB-A and Micro-USB adapters at either end (because I still know people with Micro-USB (though it obviously drops to USB2 speeds)).

At my workplace someone always orders the what they perceive to be the "best" cables. They aren't thunderbolt, they are just oversized with thick braiding. They are all so stiff and heavy you can barely handle a phone while charging without the cable pulling itself out.

As an alternative, you could get a stand-alone USB-C power meter which can be used with any cable. That way, when the cable breaks, you don't have to buy a new power meter. Here is an example of one such product (though I've never used this model): https://www.amazon.com/Adapter-Voltage-Current-Extension-Con...

This is the solution, but it is 1) expensive and 2) Thunderbolt cables are quite short compared to regular USB-C.

And to be precise, a nice, high quality thunderbolt cable from a reputable manufacturer like Apple or OWC. Protect the cable as it will have been expensive, but it will work very well.

Would it work with USB-C screens and projectors ?

No. What it can affect though is the bandwidth of the cable, meaning e.g. for HDMI cables, they might not support higher resolutions or framerates. If it's on the border you might see random disconnects or screen blanks.

The quality degrading is not something you will see, as it's a digital protocol.

"Audiophile grade" HDMI cables are likely to just be a Shenzhen bargain-bin special with some fancy looking sheathing and connectors. I would trust them less than an Amazon Basics cable.

With digital signals and ECC, the cable need only be "good enough" to get perfect data transfer through the system.

No. What I am saying is that it is hard to test the quality of a 8K 240Hz 4444 video cable without having a device that can send and receive this or even higher.

If you send bits across a line fast enough you're grtting into the territory of RF electronics, with wrong connector or conductor geometry you will get echos on the line and all kind of signal loss. A good digital protocol should keep this at bay with error correction and similar mechanisms, but if you want to know what the good cable is on a better than binary scale of works/does not, you need to look at these things.

Ah, yeah, I remember those. That miiiiight work for my use case...

--- (I remember. The poop.)

Thanks, why do you prefer that particular model?