I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
Oy.
So, with THAT new understanding, are some USB-C cables NOT suitable for DisplayPort, or is that something that works with any USB-C cable (except the subset of active TB3 cables that don't carry USB)?
[...] If you have Thunderbolt then there is no guess work on the port side, because Thunderbolt automatically includes everything.
An active Thunderbolt cable may or may not carry USB, so it's no guarantee.
My graphic is about the port not the cable. In any case, a "passive" TB cable always carries USB 3.
As a general rule of thumb:
Passive TB-3 < 0.5 meters is 40Gbps + USB Passive TB-3 > 0.5 meters is 20Gbps + USB Active TB-3 cable of any length is 40Gbps with no USB.
I have a 2013 MBP with 1 meter TB-1 cable connected to a TB-2 adapter, that's connected to a TB-3 RAID/HUB with 20Gpbs + USB (a & c) + DisplayPort + Ethernet and no PD power.
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
True, to a certain extent. But unless you’re using a 1 meter USB C 3.1 gen 2 cable, you’re limited to 5Gbs, not 10. Going to an even longer cable can result in no more than 3Gbs. A longer TB3 cable will still be 20Gbs.
Precisely why USB-A is still all the rage today and will continue to be for the next 10 years. Tech remains around as long as we continue to use it. And when consumers are confused by tech, then don't end up using it.
That's not to say USB-C or some flavor of it isn't the future. But it is to say that Apple is stupid for not making a machine these days that bridges the needs of today with that of tomorrow. The 15" MBP has enough space for an SD card slot and a USB-A port, in addition to USB-C. Having all that would help cut down on dongles.
Still pushing your same tired BS I see.
You don't need any dongles except for maybe Ethernet or SD Card Reader which you'd need on a previous gen MBP anyways. All you need is a different cable. Stop saying things that aren't true.
Precisely why USB-A is still all the rage today and will continue to be for the next 10 years. Tech remains around as long as we continue to use it. And when consumers are confused by tech, then don't end up using it.
That's not to say USB-C or some flavor of it isn't the future. But it is to say that Apple is stupid for not making a machine these days that bridges the needs of today with that of tomorrow. The 15" MBP has enough space for an SD card slot and a USB-A port, in addition to USB-C. Having all that would help cut down on dongles.
Still pushing your same tired BS I see.
You don't need any dongles except for maybe Ethernet or SD Card Reader which you'd need on a previous gen MBP anyways. All you need is a different cable. Stop saying things that aren't true.
I replaced the cables for my various external devices with ones that have a USB-C connector on the computer end instead of a USB-A connector. Easy, inexpensive, and mostly much more convenient. Mostly.
Times it isn't more convenient are when I'm part of a team. Meeting with client: "Where can I download the source files?" "I've got them right here on my thumb drive." "Hang on while I dig around in my backpack for an adapter."
Mixing in a client's studio: Client wants a particular sound effect they don't have. No problem, I have that on my portable SSD! I'll just plug it into... hang on while I dig around in my backpack for a cable with a USB-A connector...
I don't want to give up any of the universal ports just to retain a single-use port, but I'm beginning to understand why some people would.
When I bought my Touch Bar MBP two years ago I honestly thought universal adoption of USB-C was a no-brainer. I thought we'd be mostly there by now. I'm really disappointed by how slow and inconsistent the uptake has been.
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
True, to a certain extent. But unless you’re using a 1 meter USB C 3.1 gen 2 cable, you’re limited to 5Gbs, not 10. Going to an even longer cable can result in no more than 3Gbs. A longer TB3 cable will still be 20Gbs.
There MUST be a solution to this cable length issue. I'm trying to figure out how to set up a little edit suite, and having to have all the devices within three feet of each other is becoming a major pain the poop part.
Precisely why USB-A is still all the rage today and will continue to be for the next 10 years. Tech remains around as long as we continue to use it. And when consumers are confused by tech, then don't end up using it.
That's not to say USB-C or some flavor of it isn't the future. But it is to say that Apple is stupid for not making a machine these days that bridges the needs of today with that of tomorrow. The 15" MBP has enough space for an SD card slot and a USB-A port, in addition to USB-C. Having all that would help cut down on dongles.
Still pushing your same tired BS I see.
You don't need any dongles except for maybe Ethernet or SD Card Reader which you'd need on a previous gen MBP anyways. All you need is a different cable. Stop saying things that aren't true.
I replaced the cables for my various external devices with ones that have a USB-C connector on the computer end instead of a USB-A connector. Easy, inexpensive, and mostly much more convenient. Mostly.
Times it isn't more convenient are when I'm part of a team. Meeting with client: "Where can I download the source files?" "I've got them right here on my thumb drive." "Hang on while I dig around in my backpack for an adapter."
Mixing in a client's studio: Client wants a particular sound effect they don't have. No problem, I have that on my portable SSD! I'll just plug it into... hang on while I dig around in my backpack for a cable with a USB-A connector...
I don't want to give up any of the universal ports just to retain a single-use port, but I'm beginning to understand why some people would.
When I bought my Touch Bar MBP two years ago I honestly thought universal adoption of USB-C was a no-brainer. I thought we'd be mostly there by now. I'm really disappointed by how slow and inconsistent the uptake has been.
The problem the industry has, because it’s not just Apple, is that retaining all the old ports for an indefinite time will make it very difficult to transition over to the new ports. We’ve seen that problem before. People don’t want to let go. They also don’t want to have to buy new stuff.
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
True, to a certain extent. But unless you’re using a 1 meter USB C 3.1 gen 2 cable, you’re limited to 5Gbs, not 10. Going to an even longer cable can result in no more than 3Gbs. A longer TB3 cable will still be 20Gbs.
There MUST be a solution to this cable length issue. I'm trying to figure out how to set up a little edit suite, and having to have all the devices within three feet of each other is becoming a major pain the poop part.
Six-foot active 40Gbps Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock (cable recommendation in the article, dock recommendations elsewhere), then the dock to the peripherals.
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
True, to a certain extent. But unless you’re using a 1 meter USB C 3.1 gen 2 cable, you’re limited to 5Gbs, not 10. Going to an even longer cable can result in no more than 3Gbs. A longer TB3 cable will still be 20Gbs.
There MUST be a solution to this cable length issue. I'm trying to figure out how to set up a little edit suite, and having to have all the devices within three feet of each other is becoming a major pain the poop part.
I agree that it’s a pain. I always buy longer cables. In this case however, so far, at least, there seems to be no way around the problem of 20Gbs for anything longer than about half meter for TB3, and more than 5Gbs for longer than 1 meter for usb. At least, nothing cheap.
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
True, to a certain extent. But unless you’re using a 1 meter USB C 3.1 gen 2 cable, you’re limited to 5Gbs, not 10. Going to an even longer cable can result in no more than 3Gbs. A longer TB3 cable will still be 20Gbs.
There MUST be a solution to this cable length issue. I'm trying to figure out how to set up a little edit suite, and having to have all the devices within three feet of each other is becoming a major pain the poop part.
Six-foot active 40Gbps Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock (cable recommendation in the article, dock recommendations elsewhere), then the dock to the peripherals.
More like six-foot active cable to a dock followed by another six-foot active cable to another dock to get another six-feet...
But yeah, I know what you're saying, and that is the plan. Seriously though, it's still a challenge. Some things either won't fit or don't belong within a three foot radius around the dock. I'm sure I'll figure it out and acceptable compromises will be found, it's just a new and annoying constraint on workspace setup that I'm not used to.
Hey, you seem to know your way around what's allowed by the spec. Do you know if repeaters are a thing? I was only joking about the second dock, but would that actually work?
Precisely why USB-A is still all the rage today and will continue to be for the next 10 years. Tech remains around as long as we continue to use it. And when consumers are confused by tech, then don't end up using it.
That's not to say USB-C or some flavor of it isn't the future. But it is to say that Apple is stupid for not making a machine these days that bridges the needs of today with that of tomorrow. The 15" MBP has enough space for an SD card slot and a USB-A port, in addition to USB-C. Having all that would help cut down on dongles.
Still pushing your same tired BS I see.
You don't need any dongles except for maybe Ethernet or SD Card Reader which you'd need on a previous gen MBP anyways. All you need is a different cable. Stop saying things that aren't true.
What's the difference between a dongle and a different cable? They're essentially the same thing, one's just longer than the other. You basically just made the point you were trying to refute.
Precisely why USB-A is still all the rage today and will continue to be for the next 10 years. Tech remains around as long as we continue to use it. And when consumers are confused by tech, then don't end up using it.
That's not to say USB-C or some flavor of it isn't the future. But it is to say that Apple is stupid for not making a machine these days that bridges the needs of today with that of tomorrow. The 15" MBP has enough space for an SD card slot and a USB-A port, in addition to USB-C. Having all that would help cut down on dongles.
Still pushing your same tired BS I see.
You don't need any dongles except for maybe Ethernet or SD Card Reader which you'd need on a previous gen MBP anyways. All you need is a different cable. Stop saying things that aren't true.
What's the difference between a dongle and a different cable? They're essentially the same thing, one's just longer than the other. You basically just made the point you were trying to refute.
You're right. So is macxpress, if you ignore the vitriol.
New cables are just more convenient. They make the "adapting" aspect invisible.
If you think about it, the majority of cables we used before USB-C were also adapters. Mini and Micro USB to USB-A, Lightning to USB-A, USB-B to USB-A... Replace those cables with ones that have a USB-C connector on the computer end instead of a USB-A connector and it once again feels like you're living in an adapter-free environment (even though you really aren't, and never actually were in the first place).
Plus you can now use the same ports for Thunderbolt, ethernet, DisplayPort, HDMI, in addition to all your USB devices. Every port serves up every flavour on the menu.
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
True, to a certain extent. But unless you’re using a 1 meter USB C 3.1 gen 2 cable, you’re limited to 5Gbs, not 10. Going to an even longer cable can result in no more than 3Gbs. A longer TB3 cable will still be 20Gbs.
There MUST be a solution to this cable length issue. I'm trying to figure out how to set up a little edit suite, and having to have all the devices within three feet of each other is becoming a major pain the poop part.
Six-foot active 40Gbps Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock (cable recommendation in the article, dock recommendations elsewhere), then the dock to the peripherals.
More like six-foot active cable to a dock followed by another six-foot active cable to another dock to get another six-feet...
But yeah, I know what you're saying, and that is the plan. Seriously though, it's still a challenge. Some things either won't fit or don't belong within a three foot radius around the dock. I'm sure I'll figure it out and acceptable compromises will be found, it's just a new and annoying constraint on workspace setup that I'm not used to.
Hey, you seem to know your way around what's allowed by the spec. Do you know if repeaters are a thing? I was only joking about the second dock, but would that actually work?
Repeaters are not allowed. There are some rumblings that Corning is working on an optical TB3 cable to skirt this length thing -- and optical TB2 cables work with the TB3 to TB2 adapters -- but we haven't heard any more than just rumblings.
But yeah, the second dock would actually work. It isn't a repeater, per se.
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
True, to a certain extent. But unless you’re using a 1 meter USB C 3.1 gen 2 cable, you’re limited to 5Gbs, not 10. Going to an even longer cable can result in no more than 3Gbs. A longer TB3 cable will still be 20Gbs.
There MUST be a solution to this cable length issue. I'm trying to figure out how to set up a little edit suite, and having to have all the devices within three feet of each other is becoming a major pain the poop part.
Six-foot active 40Gbps Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock (cable recommendation in the article, dock recommendations elsewhere), then the dock to the peripherals.
More like six-foot active cable to a dock followed by another six-foot active cable to another dock to get another six-feet...
But yeah, I know what you're saying, and that is the plan. Seriously though, it's still a challenge. Some things either won't fit or don't belong within a three foot radius around the dock. I'm sure I'll figure it out and acceptable compromises will be found, it's just a new and annoying constraint on workspace setup that I'm not used to.
Hey, you seem to know your way around what's allowed by the spec. Do you know if repeaters are a thing? I was only joking about the second dock, but would that actually work?
Repeaters are not allowed. There are some rumblings that Corning is working on an optical TB3 cable to skirt this length thing -- and optical TB2 cables work with the TB3 to TB2 adapters -- but we haven't heard any more than just rumblings.
But yeah, the second dock would actually work. It isn't a repeater, per se.
Thanks Mike. Given the cost of Corning's optical stuff, a second dock might actually be less expensive!
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
True, to a certain extent. But unless you’re using a 1 meter USB C 3.1 gen 2 cable, you’re limited to 5Gbs, not 10. Going to an even longer cable can result in no more than 3Gbs. A longer TB3 cable will still be 20Gbs.
There MUST be a solution to this cable length issue. I'm trying to figure out how to set up a little edit suite, and having to have all the devices within three feet of each other is becoming a major pain the poop part.
Six-foot active 40Gbps Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock (cable recommendation in the article, dock recommendations elsewhere), then the dock to the peripherals.
More like six-foot active cable to a dock followed by another six-foot active cable to another dock to get another six-feet...
But yeah, I know what you're saying, and that is the plan. Seriously though, it's still a challenge. Some things either won't fit or don't belong within a three foot radius around the dock. I'm sure I'll figure it out and acceptable compromises will be found, it's just a new and annoying constraint on workspace setup that I'm not used to.
Hey, you seem to know your way around what's allowed by the spec. Do you know if repeaters are a thing? I was only joking about the second dock, but would that actually work?
Repeaters are not allowed. There are some rumblings that Corning is working on an optical TB3 cable to skirt this length thing -- and optical TB2 cables work with the TB3 to TB2 adapters -- but we haven't heard any more than just rumblings.
But yeah, the second dock would actually work. It isn't a repeater, per se.
There are cables such as this one available. They aren’t too expensive either. They have a 1 meter length too, if you want a short cable.
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
True, to a certain extent. But unless you’re using a 1 meter USB C 3.1 gen 2 cable, you’re limited to 5Gbs, not 10. Going to an even longer cable can result in no more than 3Gbs. A longer TB3 cable will still be 20Gbs.
There MUST be a solution to this cable length issue. I'm trying to figure out how to set up a little edit suite, and having to have all the devices within three feet of each other is becoming a major pain the poop part.
Six-foot active 40Gbps Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock (cable recommendation in the article, dock recommendations elsewhere), then the dock to the peripherals.
More like six-foot active cable to a dock followed by another six-foot active cable to another dock to get another six-feet...
But yeah, I know what you're saying, and that is the plan. Seriously though, it's still a challenge. Some things either won't fit or don't belong within a three foot radius around the dock. I'm sure I'll figure it out and acceptable compromises will be found, it's just a new and annoying constraint on workspace setup that I'm not used to.
Hey, you seem to know your way around what's allowed by the spec. Do you know if repeaters are a thing? I was only joking about the second dock, but would that actually work?
Repeaters are not allowed. There are some rumblings that Corning is working on an optical TB3 cable to skirt this length thing -- and optical TB2 cables work with the TB3 to TB2 adapters -- but we haven't heard any more than just rumblings.
But yeah, the second dock would actually work. It isn't a repeater, per se.
There are cables such as this one available. They aren’t too expensive either. They have a 1 meter length too, if you want a short cable.
Interesting claims on that cable. Given that this listing from markertek predates the active Thunderbolt 3 chipset that is capable of passing USB 3.1 type C, I'm skeptical. I'll see if they can send us a sample for testing.
But yeah, 2M TB3 cables are available now. We've linked to the one we currently like in the post itself.
I gotta figure something like this would be simple to implement. From the top:
1: Thunderbolt logo with version. Remove if not applicable. Version number assumes Thunderbolt 4 will continue to use the USB-C connector.
2. USB logo with version number. Remove if not applicable.
3. Power rating.
4. A for Active, P for Passive. Remove for USB-only implementations.
How easy is that? Where do we send this to get it implemented?
This is a good start. I would suggest removing the "3" for thunderbolt since only thunderbolt 3's have a USB C connector, so until thunderbolt 4 is here, its redundant. And replace the "3" with 20, 40, etc representing the max speed for the thunderbolt 3 connection. Yes, there are different max speeds for thunderbolt 3 cables and when thunderbolt 4 arrives, it will have an increased speed as well. (I have several thunderbolt 3 cables, each with different max speeds and labeled the same!). I would also get rid of the active/passive since that is redundant and replace it with DP (displayport and version number). These cables have the following 4 capabilities: 1) Thunderbolt 3 and speed (20, 40) 2) USB tyoe: 2.0, 3.0 and 3.1 each with different speeds (.5, 5, 10 Gpbs) 3) power delivery (60, 100W) and 4) Displayport. So you need a labeling for each one.
Aren't ALL cables with USB-C connectors suitable for Displayport?
Is Displayport even a common use for a cable with USB-C connections, or is it kind of an edge case? I was shopping for monitors a couple weeks ago, and everything I found used either DP, Mini-DP, or HDMI for input. I don't recall seeing any at all with a USB-C connector, with the obvious exception of LG's two Thunderbolt 3 monitors (and those don't use the DisplayPort signal anyway, do they?).
Okay.
A USB 3.1 type C cable has "alternate modes" like HDMI and DisplayPort. This allows for those USB-C to HDMI or DisplayPort cabling without some kind of active converter in the cable itself.
Simplified: the LG 4K is a USB 3.1 type C display. It carries data to and from the USB ports on the display, with the cable carrying a DisplayPort signal. The LG 5K uses a pair of DisplayPort signals to generate the 5K display and the remaining bandwidth to communicate with the USB-C ports onboard. If you connect to it with a USB 3.1 type C cable, you'll have a 4K display.
At present, I have a Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock which provides me Ethernet and power to my MacBook Pro, and then a USB-C to DisplayPort cable from the pass-through Thunderbolt 3 cable on the dock to my Acer 4K display. I have a USB 3.1 type C to DisplayPort second cable (presently disconnected) for my upper monitor when things get heavy.
I'm pretty sure USB-C with DisplayPort and Power will become the standard on monitors. Then the monitor can by default act as a USB hub and power source. For the average person, that means they only need to connect a single cable and leave the computer power adapter in a travel bag. This arrangement of course works with a Thunderbolt cable if you mind your cabling, but since so many new computers come with at least two of these ports (TB and/or USB-C) most people will have the ability to choose how to connect.
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
True, to a certain extent. But unless you’re using a 1 meter USB C 3.1 gen 2 cable, you’re limited to 5Gbs, not 10. Going to an even longer cable can result in no more than 3Gbs. A longer TB3 cable will still be 20Gbs.
There MUST be a solution to this cable length issue. I'm trying to figure out how to set up a little edit suite, and having to have all the devices within three feet of each other is becoming a major pain the poop part.
Six-foot active 40Gbps Thunderbolt 3 cable to a dock (cable recommendation in the article, dock recommendations elsewhere), then the dock to the peripherals.
More like six-foot active cable to a dock followed by another six-foot active cable to another dock to get another six-feet...
But yeah, I know what you're saying, and that is the plan. Seriously though, it's still a challenge. Some things either won't fit or don't belong within a three foot radius around the dock. I'm sure I'll figure it out and acceptable compromises will be found, it's just a new and annoying constraint on workspace setup that I'm not used to.
Hey, you seem to know your way around what's allowed by the spec. Do you know if repeaters are a thing? I was only joking about the second dock, but would that actually work?
Repeaters are not allowed. There are some rumblings that Corning is working on an optical TB3 cable to skirt this length thing -- and optical TB2 cables work with the TB3 to TB2 adapters -- but we haven't heard any more than just rumblings.
But yeah, the second dock would actually work. It isn't a repeater, per se.
There are cables such as this one available. They aren’t too expensive either. They have a 1 meter length too, if you want a short cable.
Interesting claims on that cable. Given that this listing from markertek predates the active Thunderbolt 3 chipset that is capable of passing USB 3.1 type C, I'm skeptical. I'll see if they can send us a sample for testing.
But yeah, 2M TB3 cables are available now. We've linked to the one we currently like in the post itself.
I’ve been buying pro gear from them for quite a number of years. It’s highly unlikely they would sell a product to pros that doesn’t work. They have a very good reputation.
Comments
So, with THAT new understanding, are some USB-C cables NOT suitable for DisplayPort, or is that something that works with any USB-C cable (except the subset of active TB3 cables that don't carry USB)?
As a general rule of thumb:
Passive TB-3 < 0.5 meters is 40Gbps + USB
Passive TB-3 > 0.5 meters is 20Gbps + USB
Active TB-3 cable of any length is 40Gbps with no USB.
I have a 2013 MBP with 1 meter TB-1 cable connected to a TB-2 adapter, that's connected to a TB-3 RAID/HUB with 20Gpbs + USB (a & c) + DisplayPort + Ethernet and no PD power.
I guess someone could. But it makes more sense to have, for example, a 4 port USB-C hub with a 1 port Thunderbolt interface.
You wrote: "If you have Thunderbolt then there is no guess work on the port side..."
My response should have been: "But all bets are off on the starboard side."
Using USB-C (USB 3.1 GEN 2) cable over Thunderbolt to a USB-C monitor bypasses the TB-3 cable length/type limitations.
Still pushing your same tired BS I see.
You don't need any dongles except for maybe Ethernet or SD Card Reader which you'd need on a previous gen MBP anyways. All you need is a different cable. Stop saying things that aren't true.
Times it isn't more convenient are when I'm part of a team. Meeting with client: "Where can I download the source files?" "I've got them right here on my thumb drive." "Hang on while I dig around in my backpack for an adapter."
Mixing in a client's studio: Client wants a particular sound effect they don't have. No problem, I have that on my portable SSD! I'll just plug it into... hang on while I dig around in my backpack for a cable with a USB-A connector...
I don't want to give up any of the universal ports just to retain a single-use port, but I'm beginning to understand why some people would.
When I bought my Touch Bar MBP two years ago I honestly thought universal adoption of USB-C was a no-brainer. I thought we'd be mostly there by now. I'm really disappointed by how slow and inconsistent the uptake has been.
but at some point, they will, like it or not.
I agree that it’s a pain. I always buy longer cables. In this case however, so far, at least, there seems to be no way around the problem of 20Gbs for anything longer than about half meter for TB3, and more than 5Gbs for longer than 1 meter for usb. At least, nothing cheap.
But yeah, I know what you're saying, and that is the plan. Seriously though, it's still a challenge. Some things either won't fit or don't belong within a three foot radius around the dock. I'm sure I'll figure it out and acceptable compromises will be found, it's just a new and annoying constraint on workspace setup that I'm not used to.
Hey, you seem to know your way around what's allowed by the spec. Do you know if repeaters are a thing? I was only joking about the second dock, but would that actually work?
New cables are just more convenient. They make the "adapting" aspect invisible.
If you think about it, the majority of cables we used before USB-C were also adapters. Mini and Micro USB to USB-A, Lightning to USB-A, USB-B to USB-A... Replace those cables with ones that have a USB-C connector on the computer end instead of a USB-A connector and it once again feels like you're living in an adapter-free environment (even though you really aren't, and never actually were in the first place).
Plus you can now use the same ports for Thunderbolt, ethernet, DisplayPort, HDMI, in addition to all your USB devices. Every port serves up every flavour on the menu.
But yeah, the second dock would actually work. It isn't a repeater, per se.
https://www.markertek.com/product/mc3-tb3a-2m/mc3-tb3-2m-2-meter-thunderbolt-3-40gbps-100-watts-usb-c-certified-active-cable