• lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    Or just a little dongle with both of these ports which can be plugged in on any usb-c on any side?

    Dongles break, slide off, cause disconnects, can cause internal damage to the connector if the cables you have to connect are heavy, etc…, I already have the bad experience of having to use a USB hub to attach storage.

    When it comes to engineering, I’m of the opinion that built-in > bolt in.

    • Petter1@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Heavy cables are just stupid no matter the port used, or dongle. Dongles do not brake faster than normal ports do. Normal ports do internal damage just the same way. “Cause disconnects”, only if damaged.

      I don’t have problems with my dongle (which I had to use like only 2 times a year, anyway)

      • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Wait!.. You don’t have problems with something you only used twice in a year? No way!

        Its clear you and the person you replied to have different use cases for your devices, and perhaps what they are saying is just as valid as what you are saying.

        • Petter1@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          😌 I “need” it only twice on my daily driver a year.

          There are many more devices I use in various situations with various ports and dongles. Heavy cables are a pain for all of them, no matter if dongles or no dongles. In fact dongles often prevent internal damage, since they often have a short flexible cable on the thunderbolt side.

          But I guess doing something just a little different does need a lot of time to get used to, especially at the age of boomers 🤷🏻

          • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            That’s the issue then. You think it’s boomers who dont like change as opposed to capitalists removing functionality to sell it back to you in a separate package. I would aregue its zoomers not being able to identify when they are being conned.

            • Petter1@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              Lol, I would literally choose 4x thunderbolt multi function ports than 10x dedicated only one use case ports. Not because of capitalism but because of functionality.

              • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                Ok. Cool, but like i said, your use case and the person you responded to are obviously different.

                That doesnt have to be “because boomer” or be someone is objectively right or wrong. Because thats not the issue.

                You are just trying to be right about something that is completely subjective.

                I argued that taking the ports away and replacing them with usb ports is not as cut and dry as sayi g that is better. It depends on your own personal needs.

                I accept that a port that can be anything you want is great and may have some advantages over a dedicated port that has only one function. But there are downsides.

                You need to carry around a bunch of adapters to get what you need. You are limited to those 4 ports. Remember that most laptops had multiple usb ports alongside multiple display and audio ports so you have lost more than ypu have gained.

                You also are still limited to 4 devices or you need a docking station which adds more bulk. And that docking station has limited power unless you connect an external power source.

                I feel like you are looking at your needs and severely oversimplifying this debate. Which isnt helpful and doesnt make you right by default.

                • Petter1@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  23 hours ago

                  You travel with one dongle where up to 10 devices can be plugged in in various ports

                  • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    21 hours ago

                    Thunderbolt 3 ports can provide 15w of power. If you fill them up with devices, especially ones that draw power, then your docking station very quickly needs its own power source in order to make them all work. I’ve already had a docking station refuse to extend my laptop to multiple screens because it needed its own plug.

                    Anywayz im not arguing that they dont have advantages. Im arfuing that they aren’t necessarily better than having individual ports dedicated to specific functions.

        • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          The PITA is that I use RJ45 pretty much every day. It’s not just a matter of “oh there’s wifi everywhere”; 99% of wifis everywhere are not open, or are actually not connected to the networks I’m working on, or I need the physical connector to diagnose wire / networking issues; and the performance of wifi on Linux on refurbrished machines tends to be subpar and they tend to not allow for “developer mode” options (playing with your MAC, WPA supplanting, etc).

          If Tesla, the actual Tesla, had given us technology instead of the thief Elon Edison, then perhaps we’d somehow have point-to-point wireless RJ45 that would function everywhere, and I wouldn’t need the connector.

            • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              16 hours ago

              I think you mean a Ethernet to USB-C cable?

              In any case, I already have the bad experience of Ethernet to USB-A cables not working, and not being able to know if they need some sort of driver. Not even on Linux, which is weird enough for me to temporarily give up on them and prefer built-in to bolt-in for something that’s so important.

              • Petter1@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 hours ago

                Yea… comparing legacy USB with C and think one can apply the same reasoning… usb C works great with Ethernet protocol in personal experience.