Quick Charge vs USB Power Delivery

[B0WIE]

This is the problem. No one is informing the general public (as Kevin points out, even most nerds that want to know are confused) and they dont know that there is something they should know. They're not reading manuals and have no way of identifying their ignorance until something goes wrong. Not conforming to the standards is a HUGE mistake and Sammy's decision to roll out microUSB with QC on a 2016 phone compounds the problem by adding more confusion, not only in the public, but among oems about which features to promote, include and support and in which exact manner they choose to do so. This is a really easy concept and standard that oems and cable makers are stumbling all over. If the oems don't understand it, the general public definitely does not understand it. ... Buy as I said earlier, the general public doesn't even know there's something they should understand, let alone understand it.

As far as HTC goes, the 10 isn't out yet so you'll have to wait to see if that argument will be valid. Regarding LG, I haven't followed but where are the failures this far? If the 10 fails to have documentation AND devices fail then there's certainly a point but a lot has to go wrong for that to come true.

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

If you're going to act rude, that tells me you're out of valid points. If QC 3 fails you can feel validated. Until then, it's superior tech and I'm looking forward to it.

You are the first person I've seen in a very long time (granted, I don't post 100 times a day anymore) that is championing a feature that is actively deficient compared to other available features with such.....passion.

If you recall, I said in my first reply in this thread that I'm sure HTC made sure that right now QC3 is not causing any user facing issues. At least, I have enough faith in HTC to believe that's the case. My issue is with how this will pan out in the future, since we know that more devices will come out that DO support the Power Delivery spec and the 10 won't work correctly with those.

Makes me wonder about compatibility with other accessories as well. We know that JBL is making some USB-C powered headphones which I'm sure will work great. My curiosity is piqued because that would imply that they need to have a custom power delivery mechanism for those headphones OR sending power OUT OF the port is perfectly fine and the only issue is with charging.

 

[Aquila]

As far as HTC goes, the 10 isn't out yet so you'll have to wait to see if that argument will be valid. Regarding LG, I haven't followed but where are the failures this far? If the 10 fails to have documentation AND devices fail then there's certainly a point but a lot has to go wrong for that to come true.

My argument wasn't that something was good or bad, it's that almost no one knows anything and very few people are trying to change that. When you shop for a replacement cable on Amazon, there's nothing to indicate what's compatible and safe with your device except maybe reviews.... which most people dont read or ignore in favor of price.

What the phone supports is 10% of the problem. Because the phone assumes you're only ever going to use the cable and block that came in the box it that you'll by a replacement of it from them directly. Dumb assumptions but that's the limit of their control in this environment. The next 20% is that charger oems don't know what to do. The next 50% is that the public doesn't understand anything about what is going on, not even enough to understand that there is a gap in their knowledge. The final 20% is the first solvable one that negates the other 80% and makes this one easily solvable issue: development of, commitment to a spec and adherence to quality control and development within the industry standard specs.

That doesn't inhibit development, it puts boundaries on what the limits of risk are. I have offered no opinions on which particular technologies are the best and it'd be dumb for any of us to do so, because the final specs aren't ready to know what is and isn't going to work. The one thing that can be safely said is that using blocks and cables that oversupply with a phone that doesn't limit properly can cause damage and that's one heck of a good reason to not provide or support blocks and cables that are outside of the guidelines - even if the makers of those blocks and cables think it is on because the device can limit current.

 

[Aquila]

As far as HTC goes, the 10 isn't out yet so you'll have to wait to see if that argument will be valid. Regarding LG, I haven't followed but where are the failures this far? If the 10 fails to have documentation AND devices fail then there's certainly a point but a lot has to go wrong for that to come true.

The existence of documentation, even if it goes beyond, "never use charging blocks and cables other than those provided by HTC" wouldn't do anything to educate the public when they're trying to mix and match components at lowest cause in an unregulated third party economy. The existence of information doesn't mean people know it and understand it. I called out a need for standards and education, not a warning label. Huuuuuuuge difference

 

[Aquila]

If you're going to act rude, that tells me you're out of valid points. If QC 3 fails you can feel validated. Until then, it's superior tech and I'm looking forward to it.

Wait... that's not how logic works. The new hypothesis has to be substantiated, not assumed true until proven false. The exact opposite is in fact the way it works. You assume the new hypothesis is not true, try to falsify it and only when you've eliminated most reasonable alternatives can it then be said to be supported by the evidence. In this case... there's been no statement of evidence to back up QC3 as being "superior tech" and there is, in fact, evidence to suggest that it is not. So we should assume it is inferior until it is established as a point of fact that, due to the weight of evidence, QC3 is superior.

 

[B0WIE]

You are the first person I've seen in a very long time (granted, I don't post 100 times a day anymore) that is championing a feature that is actively deficient compared to other available features with such.....passion.

If you recall, I said in my first reply in this thread that I'm sure HTC made sure that right now QC3 is not causing any user facing issues. At least, I have enough faith in HTC to believe that's the case. My issue is with how this will pan out in the future, since we know that more devices will come out that DO support the Power Delivery spec and the 10 won't work correctly with those.

Makes me wonder about compatibility with other accessories as well. We know that JBL is making some USB-C powered headphones which I'm sure will work great. My curiosity is piqued because that would imply that they need to have a custom power delivery mechanism for those headphones OR sending power OUT OF the port is perfectly fine and the only issue is with charging.

I don't care to go down the rabbit hole with you while you continue to make personal commentary and wind the subject through through a variety of points that I was never debating in the first place. Rather than repeat myself and belabor this convo I'll let you have the last word so we can hopefully put this to bed.

The existence of documentation, even if it goes beyond, "never use charging blocks and cables other than those provided by HTC" wouldn't do anything to educate the public when they're trying to mix and match components at lowest cause in an unregulated third party economy. The existence of information doesn't mean people know it and understand it. I called out a need for standards and education, not a warning label. Huuuuuuuge difference

I think you make well-spoken and valid points, some of which I do agree with. The fact that we haven't seen failure in operation yet leaves a large door open and as much as I want to think that Qualcom, HTC, and HTC may have made a huge oversight, I just can't make that jump on the given data.

Regarding consumers and their use of required components, I hope we can agree to disagree. I have a side biz in components/parts and I've found that people can be surprisingly competent about using the required components when instructed to do so. But, I won't disregard your opinion on the matter as there is a bit of undeniable truth in both perspectives. I once has a customer who claimed to have never operated a screwdriver and needed instructions on which type to buy. So, I certainly can't dismiss your point.

 

[B0WIE]

Wait... that's not how logic works. The new hypothesis has to be substantiated, not assumed true until proven false. The exact opposite is in fact the way it works. You assume the new hypothesis is not true, try to falsify it and only when you've eliminated most reasonable alternatives can it then be said to be supported by the evidence. In this case... there's been no statement of evidence to back up QC3 as being "superior tech" and there is, in fact, evidence to suggest that it is not. So we should assume it is inferior until it is established as a point of fact that, due to the weight of evidence, QC3 is superior.

Almost, but you're incorrect because the "fact", as it is presented at the origin, is that QC3 works (or whatever it is we are debating at this point as it's gotten bent and mangled in a dozen ways). To say that QC3 fails is the unproven hypothesis. I have yet to see that be substantiated. If you're making the leap that we must reject QC3 until it is proven, I can't get down with that logic. The world doesn't operate that way unless you're talking about standards and regulations, which I'm sure it's already been through. There is a guarantee that the product will work (that's something that is required by manufacturers) and it is tested to work before arrival to market. Challenging it's function is perfectly valid. But, you can't say that "QC3 fails" is the fact and it's on me to prove it works.

 

[AllenRulz]

So what I'm reading is type-c and quickcharge 3.0 aren't problems in themselves, but when put together in a phone then it's not compatible at all? Or just the HTC 10 and G5 aren't using the right volts... Just trying to understand because I'm getting the new Nexus this year and I'm sure it's going to have both the quickcharge 3.0 and type-c.

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

So what I'm reading is type-c and quickcharge 3.0 aren't problems in themselves, but when put together in a phone then it's not compatible at all? Or just the HTC 10 and G5 aren't using the right volts... Just trying to understand because I'm getting the new Nexus this year and I'm sure it's going to have both the quickcharge 3.0 and type-c.

If Google goes with what they usually do it will have Power Delivery and not any kind of quick charge since that is not compatible with USB-C.

 

[Bearcats98]

Ok...the debate seems to have gone along "Only use approved cords". However in this day and age where even with out changing tech specs of the pinout usage we still have cheaply made cords that tout approval that only burn up devices. So thats really step one. Make sure to get a good cord from a reputable company.

I am ok with stretching things technically as long as I understand all the risks involved. I have my car tuned to provide more PSI. Certainly not manufacturer recommended and a warranty voider. However in this case the {phone manufacturer here} needs to make sure I wont blow my ish up. I want to be able to:

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).

I mean, aren't my questions really the crux of the issue for the vast majority of the population?

 

[jmkhenka]

People confuse USB-C powerdelivery with plain ol' USB-C. Nowhere is PD synonymous with USB-C.

The 6P and 5X dont use "power delivery" they use the plain 5V/3A chargin option that all usb-C chargers should be capable off. Just like a normal USB-A charger has 1A, unless you have a fancy apple charger with fancy apple cables and devices.

USB-C can much well use QuickCharger (QC) and it will just allow you to use existing QC-chargers with your new device, with A to C cables or adaptors.

At the same time it allows to use 15W option of C-chargers like the one delivered with the 6P but then with C-C cables ONLY.

HTC and Qualcomm gives users more choice. The phone will not explode or damage chargers more then what a 6P can do (wich incorrect cables). Quickcharge is intelligent and both charger and phone agrees on what it use to charge, depending on cable (all cables are not made identical).

PD is a spec in *addition* to the C-connector.

Usb-C dont need a power delivery or quickcharge for phones due to the fact the cables handle higher amperage then the old A and microUSB cables does, but if a laptop wants to charge with C cable and port it can. Most 3-4000 mah batteries limits itself around 15W anyway, its fast enough (sub 1 hour).

I like that the 10 has QC capability, i have QC-chargers and the included charger works for my other QC-devices unlike the C-charger that came with my N5X.

with the N5X/6P charger and cable the 10 should be identical in chargetimes.

 

[jmkhenka]

Google uses usb-c with basic 1.5A/3A power delivery that USB-C allows. Power Delivery is a spec in itself but neither device needs PD to charge - 15W is enough for any cellphone on the market today.

 

[jmkhenka]

So what I'm reading is type-c and quickcharge 3.0 aren't problems in themselves, but when put together in a phone then it's not compatible at all? Or just the HTC 10 and G5 aren't using the right volts... Just trying to understand because I'm getting the new Nexus this year and I'm sure it's going to have both the quickcharge 3.0 and type-c.

Google will probably not use quickcharge if that means they have to pay qualcomm to use it. Google is cheap and they probably reasons that basic usb-c charge speeds are enough, after all 15W is alot of power for a device with 3000-4000mAh batteries. To go higher they have to use PowerDelivery sure but that will make the charger more expensive.

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

People confuse USB-C powerdelivery with plain ol' USB-C. Nowhere is PD synonymous with USB-C.

The 6P and 5X dont use "power delivery" they use the plain 5V/3A chargin option that all usb-C chargers should be capable off. Just like a normal USB-A charger has 1A, unless you have a fancy apple charger with fancy apple cables and devices.

USB-C can much well use QuickCharger (QC) and it will just allow you to use existing QC-chargers with your new device, with A to C cables or adaptors.

At the same time it allows to use 15W option of C-chargers like the one delivered with the 6P but then with C-C cables ONLY.

HTC and Qualcomm gives users more choice. The phone will not explode or damage chargers more then what a 6P can do (wich incorrect cables). Quickcharge is intelligent and both charger and phone agrees on what it use to charge, depending on cable (all cables are not made identical).

PD is a spec in *addition* to the C-connector.

Usb-C dont need a power delivery or quickcharge for phones due to the fact the cables handle higher amperage then the old A and microUSB cables does, but if a laptop wants to charge with C cable and port it can. Most 3-4000 mah batteries limits itself around 15W anyway, its fast enough (sub 1 hour).

I like that the 10 has QC capability, i have QC-chargers and the included charger works for my other QC-devices unlike the C-charger that came with my N5X.

with the N5X/6P charger and cable the 10 should be identical in chargetimes.

6p/5x does support USB Power Delivery 2.0:

Battery Life & Charge Time - The Google Nexus 6P Review

The Nexus 6P along with the 5X are some of the first devices to come with USB Power Delivery 2.0, the official specification for device charging as opposed to more proprietary charger communication protocols such as those from Qualcomm (Quickcharge) or Adaptive Fast Charging that is used in Samsung chargers.

^^^ On top of that, if you plug on device directly in to the other with a C > C cable it will start charging, which comes ONLY with the Power Delivery spec.

 

[Bearcats98]

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).

 

[mfreeland]

Nothing is going to blow up......

 

[Aquila]

Nothing is going to blow up......

You sure? Benson had equipment ruined by uncompliant hardware.

 

[Bearcats98]

You sure? Benson had equipment ruined by uncompliant hardware.

I think Benson's stuff (the sampling I read) was due to poorly constructed cables; which is what he was testing.

 

[Aquila]

I think Benson's stuff (the sampling I read) was due to poorly constructed cables; which is what he was testing.

It demonstrated that everything from the wall to the device needs to be proper equipment and that taking shortcuts can ruin devices and before dangerous. His issue was the cables, but the whole gambit from blocks to cords to devices needs to be on the same page to have safe operation.

 

[Bearcats98]

It demonstrated that everything from the wall to the device needs to be proper equipment and that taking shortcuts can ruin devices and before dangerous. His issue was the cables, but the whole gambit from blocks to cords to devices needs to be on the same page to have safe operation.

Oh, I agree. Its why I was a bit aggravated with all the magazine racing in this thread that when the very specific questions were asked; the crickets showed up.