Quick Charge vs USB Power Delivery

[Aquila]

I still see the bantering of spec...but nobody has addressed the "normal guy" questions. Anybody willing to state an opinion on the following four questions/statements?

1) Plug into existing 1A or 2A wall wort and not blow my phone up (Type A to Type C) or burn the wall wort up.
2) Plug into my laptop and not burn my laptop up or my phone up (Type A to Type C).
3) Plug into my laptop and move data across without burning my phone up.
4) Plug into my existing 2A car charge and not burn my car up. (Type A to Type C).

Does anybody that understands these spec better than I see an issue with the above provided I actually get a proper Type A to Type C 3.1 cord? I don't care about charging and data transfer at the same time at all (which is supposed to be a huge selling point of Type C).

2 and 3 shouldn't pose any problems given proper cables. 1 and 4 would only be a problem if they're QC and not just normal 1/2A with proper cables and then only if they are sending a QC 2.0 current through and the device is not limiting it for some reason, such as misreading the incoming stream. While I have and use a QC 2.0 car charger from an OEM I trust, I still get nervous about DC to AC conversion happening just prior to an aftermarket cable going into a device through a port that relies on the device to limit current to a value ABOVE what the charger will send if it is unable to be recognized as QC compliant.

HTC is probably not going to have any issue using their included charger, they would have tested that a lot in conjunction with Qualcomm. But they can't test aftermarket items that they're in most cases going to rely on not just to mimic their intended settings with QC 3, but to safely pass through backwards compatibility to QC 2 with a totally different set of conditions.

In my opinion I'd recommend waiting for some extensive testing by experts, rather than just relying on theory from nerds.

 

[Michael Benvenuti]

1) Plug into existing 1A or 2A wall wort and not blow my phone up (Type A to Type C) or burn the wall wort up.
2) Plug into my laptop and not burn my laptop up or my phone up (Type A to Type C).
3) Plug into my laptop and move data across without burning my phone up.
4) Plug into my existing 2A car charge and not burn my car up. (Type A to Type C).

Does anybody that understands these spec better than I see an issue with the above provided I actually get a proper Type A to Type C 3.1 cord? I don't care about charging and data transfer at the same time at all (which is supposed to be a huge selling point of Type C).

For your paticular questions the answer is the same. With the proper cable (with the correct resister inside) it should all be safe.

All the devices you mention that are the power source would have USB Type A ports. These ports should coform to the legacy USB A standards.
USB C devices (like a phone) are expecting to be told how much power they can draw. The lagacy Type A standards do not provide this.
Type A to C cables should take care of this issue. Since any cable with at least 1 USB C connector will be made after the Type C standard is published it is expect to conform to the new standard.
The new standard says these adapter cables must include a specific resister value to tell USB C devices that they are connected to a legacy USB A power source and the USB C devices should be limited to the legacy standards.

 

[Michael Benvenuti]

He is saying it "violates" the letter of the law. Which is fine and dandy. But what I am not seeing is a laymens explanation as to the RISKS of playing this game. I am not supposed to over boost the turbo in my car; but I do it...daily. I am looking for something that isn't hiding behind engineering speak. And I do respect what Benson is saying but...it needs more laymen speak clarification.

From what I gather from reading the USB C spec and Bensons comment is that QC could change the voltage it is supplying when a USB C device is not expecting it. Having a voltage mismatch could cause damage to both devices.

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

This is why standards matter:

http://www.androidcentral.com/my-htc-10-hates-pixel-c-charger

 

[Aquila]

This is why standards matter:

My HTC 10 hates the Pixel C charger | Android Central

What about to post that link but couldn't find this dirty old thread. It must have been buried under some smelly socks.

 

[dpham00]

This is why standards matter:

http://www.androidcentral.com/my-htc-10-hates-pixel-c-charger

People make chargers to usb c standards. Htc chose to use usb c port. Yet chose not to follow the usb c standard. That's a big no no in my book. I am not surprised that there are problems like this.

 

[Aquila]

http://forums.androidcentral.com/ht...hat-charger-you-use-htc-10-a.html#post5182312

This is scary. Not because we didn't know it - we've been talking about it for quite a bit in the forums and elsewhere, but this is a very big problem. Because most consumers don't know anything about this and literally no one is telling them. It's not common sense and they're not going to read. OEM's need to adopt and support the standards and stick to them. This is why.

 

[LeoRex]

OEM's need to adopt and support the standards and stick to them. This is why.

Yeah... I have no idea what is going through these morons' minds... This isn't putting in a AA battery backwards. These things are supplying significant amounts of electrical force into a storage cell that will quite literally explode if you mess with it enough.

Back in the day, everyone played fast and loose with micro USB... chargers that worked on phone didn't work on others... the cords were a mish-mosh and you have no idea if you had a charging only cable or one that could copy your ringtones. That all eventually settled down and OEMs stuck to spec. And, because of this, everyone got used to being able to mix and match charging bricks and cords because they knew that if the damn thing fit, it'd work well enough (unless it was a REALLY cheapo one).

Now we're back to the wild west days.... OEMs deciding they can do whatever they want to the phone and cable, slap a USB-C connection on it and call it a day. Problem is that batteries are much larger, can push much larger amounts of current and connect to bricks that are happy to serve up that current.

Guess HTC (and LG for that matter) love class action lawsuits.

 

[Almeuit]

http://forums.androidcentral.com/ht...hat-charger-you-use-htc-10-a.html#post5182312

This is scary. Not because we didn't know it - we've been talking about it for quite a bit in the forums and elsewhere, but this is a very big problem. Because most consumers don't know anything about this and literally no one is telling them. It's not common sense and they're not going to read. OEM's need to adopt and support the standards and stick to them. This is why.

Agreed. That would freak me out if it got that hot. Most people who just plug and go wouldn't understand what happened.

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

Even worse, HTC knew this was a problem or they would not have put a warning on the device about incompatible chargers.

Now, EVEN WORSE, that safety measure is clearly not reliable.

 

[Golfdriver97]

This is all I have to say..

 

[Bearcats98]

Was there any usable data in that other thread that got shut down due to the bickering?

 

[Tefen]

Galaxy S7 is already listed as a QC 2.0 device.