• Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, but that only works when your device uses less than 100W, because that’s what USB-C is currently rated for. Gaming laptops can easily use two or three times that amount while simply idling on the desktop. Once you start looking at GPU/CPU power requirements and active cooling, the power consumption quickly stacks up.

      These devices usually have IEC power bricks with a fat barrel connector, because that’s what they require to be able to get enough wattage into the device. Requiring them to charge via USB-C is going to have them using two or three USB-C ports just to break even and avoid losing power. The power adapter would look like some weird fan-out adapter with one IEC power cable going in and three or four USB-C cables on the other end.

      I’m laughing at the idea of a device having three or four USB-C ports, and not being able to use any of them for anything except charging.

      • kalleboo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        USB-C has already standardized 240W charging. Apple already ships a 140W brick with their laptops since like a year or two ago, and Framework is shipping a 180W brick later this year.

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So - like I know that many laptops charge from USB-C right now. The one I’m typing on does. Why do people seem to think they’re smart in pointing this out?

      So then what’s the point? People will still be buying cheap USB chargers because, well, they’re cheap. And they’ll have the expensive one for their laptop. Problem…solved?