Eric_WVGG

Damn. Those are cool. I'm nearly positive they are in violation of the USB 3.1 spec, but I'll be grabbing a couple anyway.

[edit] Here it is, courtesy of some wonk:

This adapter does NOT comply with the USB Type-C specification version 1.1 section 2.2 of the specification which states the following :
"USB Type-C receptacle to USB legacy adapters are explicitly not defined or allowed. Such adapters would allow many invalid and potentially unsafe cable connections to be contructed by users."

This is because if you combine this adapter with a USB Type-A to Type-C cable, you may create a dangerous condition where two power supplies may be connected together opposing each other using the combined cable.

Furthermore, this adapter violates Section 2.3.1 :
"Power is not applied to the USB Type-C host or hub receptacle (VBUS or VCONN) until the DFP detects the presence of an attached device (UFP) port."

In my testing, even when no UFP device is attached, this receptacle port's VBUS line is powered on at 5V. It should only be at 5V when a UFP device is present.

This adapter and port violates Section 4.5.1.2.1 - Please see figure 4-5. A correct DFP receptacle must use two distinct Rp resistors. According to my testing, the CHENYANG adapter leaves the CC lines completely floating, with no Rp at all on either CC pin.
This means that the Chromebook Pixel 2015 does not detect a charger device at all, as it depends on the presence of Rp to start charging.

Finally, this adapter also claims to support USB 3.1 SuperSpeed, but because it is only a passive adapter, there is no way to support both orientations of a potential USB device as that requires a mux on the receptacle end. Indeed, when I tried it, it would only ever enumerate a USB-C thumbdrive as high speed (usb 2.0).

Long story short : This adapter is a type forbidden by the USB Type-C specification, and should NOT exist. It gets my lowest rating of 1-star because there is no simple thing that the manufacturer can do to make this adapter correct.

I got to play with a Magic Link at a… Best Buy? Circuit City? … back in the day. Was immediately turned off by the dorky Microsoft Bob style "here's your desk" UI. Still surprised at how poorly they sold.

Looks like a fun movie, though, in the vein of Helvetica and Objectified.

eightzero said:

I find the wifi/ networking space all quite confusing, and really don't know what to make about Apple abandoning it. For all their "we make peoples' lives better with better products" and "be true to ourselves as Apple" I sure am not seeing that in this case… 

Wifi should be like my other utilities. A fee to have it made reliable and safe. Apple could do this easily. 

Gads, how coole would it be to take a device out of a box, plug it into the wall, and say, "hey Siri. Set up my wifi." She might ask a few questions, and...done.

Regarding their leaving the router space, it's because Apple still runs like a small company. They can dedicate engineers to boring shit like laser printers, displays, and wifi routers, or they can revolutionize the world with iPads and Airpods. They don't have enough engineers to do both and if they did the company would grow so large that it wouldn't really be Apple anymore.

They can't make wifi "like a utility" for the same reason that they can't fix cable television with the Apple TV: the "pipes" are run by companies like Verizon and Comcast that are hostile to their customers.

The experience you describe at the end is honestly not far off from Plume, though. They'd make a "plum" acquisition target for Apple IMO, kind of a hands-off Beats style arrangement.

Soli said:

Eric_WVGG said:

Damnit. This means that their new external display is probably another year off too.

I know a lot of folks want the cheese grater back, but there's no reason for a computer to be that goddamned heavy. 

1) To me, that seems more defunct than getting an AirPort mesh network.

2) What about a compromise with a tower design that is much smaller?

Apple acknowledged that there would be a new display alongside the Mac Pro promise.

I honestly couldn't care less how big or small the tower is (hell, I'm exclusively a laptop guy). I was just always annoyed with how unnecessarily heavy the cheese grater models were.

I hope this is a step toward Bicycle as its own option in Apple Maps directions. Cycling with Airpods or an Apple Watch with turn-by-turn directions is just amazing, but "car" directions sometimes send riders down unsafe streets, and "pedestrian" directions send against one-way streets.

Google Maps always get this right, but doesn't work with Apple “wearables”. Just another reminder that the future isn't quite here yet…