Most smartphones nowadays support the type-c interface. At least 50 out of 100 people can use the type-c port. We can't help but think about how it has achieved its current level of popularity? How did it gain public recognition?

This starts with the earliest Nokia round socket, and after the round socket comes the mini USB interface, which is more portable and compact. But due to performance not keeping up with gradual obsolescence. Subsequently, the micro USB interface emerged, which was also the one commonly used in the past. It has a smaller size, higher transmission efficiency, and supports different charging protocols.

But why is it still difficult to eliminate micro USB with so many advantages? There are three reasons. Firstly, the interface of the micro USB does not support forward and reverse port insertion. In urgent situations, it often leads to incorrect insertion. If the force is too strong, it will not only damage the cable. Secondly, type-c supports better power, up to 100W. And it supports forward and reverse charging and bidirectional charging. Finally, the type-c socket supports the USB 3.1 standard, with a transmission rate of up to 10Gbps. Greatly increased data transmission efficiency and reduced waiting time.

It is precisely because of the above points that type-C is widely used, not only on mobile phones, but also on devices such as computers and Bluetooth headphones. But even so, we still need to note that not all type-C ports are full of blood, and many on the market are residual versions.

As mentioned earlier, one of the reasons why type-c can squeeze out micro USB is its support for the USB 3.1 standard. Its premise is to support the corresponding interface transmission protocol, as a single interface is not possible. It should be noted that type-c is a physical specification, not a transport protocol, and these are two things.

At present, the most common transmission protocols on type-c carriers are the USB X.X protocol (developed by the USB IF Association) and Thunderbolt3 protocol. Leaving Thunderbolt 3 aside for now, let's take the USB X.X version as an example. The protocols in the USB X.X version include USB 1.0, USB 2.0, USB 3.1 Gen1, USB 3.1 Gen2, and USB 4, with increasing transmission rates.

USB 3.1 Gen2 protocol, with a maximum transmission rate of 10Gb/s. Assuming its file transfer speed is 10 minutes, then USB 2.0 takes two to three hours. Not to mention the maximum 40Gbps transmission rate of USB 4 and Thunderbolt 3.

So, even if it's all type-C ports, the effects they bring are completely different due to different transmission protocols. So, it is inevitable that there will be a situation of fish in the eye mixed with pearls in the market, such as some type-c ports having few effective pins and only supporting low-speed protocols. This still needs to be noted.

We all know that type-C ports will be more widely used in the future, especially with the emergence of higher transmission efficiency in USB4 and Thunderbolt 3, and the scope of popularization will also be further expanded.

But the better the type-C port, the higher its cost, which is also one of the reasons why there are residual blood versions of the C port on the market. Therefore, it will take some time for the type-C port to truly become fully popular. As for how long, I believe time will give the answer.