←back to thread

I got almost all of my wishes granted with RP2350

(dmitry.gr)
700 points elipsitz | 1 comments | 08 Aug 24 13:03 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
nimish ◴[08 Aug 24 17:47 UTC] No.41194268[source]▶
Gross, the dev board uses micro-USB. It's 2024! Otherwise amazing work. Exactly what's needed to compete with the existing giants.
replies(4): >>41194477 #>>41194889 #>>41195331 #>>41196293 #
janice1999 ◴[08 Aug 24 18:48 UTC] No.41194889[source]▶
It saves cost and none of the features of USB-C (speed, power delivery etc) are supported. Makes sense.
replies(2): >>41197522 #>>41199013 #
str3wer ◴[08 Aug 24 23:37 UTC] No.41197522[source]▶
the price difference from usb to usb-c is less than 2 cents
replies(2): >>41197710 #>>41200495 #
rldjbpin ◴[09 Aug 24 10:31 UTC] No.41200495[source]▶
devil's advocate: cables for an average user is a different story. also not to forget the vast range of cables already existing out there.

also "proper" usb-c support is another can of worms, and maybe sticking to an older standard gives you freedom from all that.

replies(2): >>41200961 #>>41205674 #
1. kmeisthax ◴[09 Aug 24 21:55 UTC] No.41205674{3}[source]▶
A USB-C port that only supports USB2 data and power only needs a few resistors across some pins to trigger legacy modes and disable high current/voltage operation. All the extra bits are the things that jack up the cost.

USB3 and altmodes require extra signal lines and tolerances in the cable.

High-voltage/current requires PD negotiation (over the CC pins AFAIK)

Data and power role swaps require muxes and dual-role controllers.

That's all the stuff that makes USB-C a pain in the ass, and it's all the sort of thing RPi Nanos don't support.