Nintendo Switch not complient with USB-C

[Drak3]

40 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

I should back up.

 

Let me know when they ship a phone with a USB 3.0 Type A cable. I got a USB 2.0 cable with my G6 even though a website proved the phone is 3.1 Gen 1 capable.

You're in for a long wait. The Lumia 950/XL is the only phone I've seen come with a 3.0 cable in the box.

 

And because they give you that cable AND a dedicated charger. Not just a type A wall wart.

[Delphi1662]

so most of this flies over my head what does this mean for me as an owner ? what kind of precautions do i need to keep on a lookout for as far as third party stuff?

[GoodBytes]

I think the big issue with USB Type-C is that it is still too new. The standard wasn't set in stone while many companies worked on the implementation of it in its device. In the original findings the author suggests that a hardware change is needed to solve this. The problem is that there is no hardware beside the SoC. So the issue is with the Tegra X1 chip the system uses. Probably it only supported part of USB Type-C, and Nintendo went with that... that is just my guess.

 

[update]It has its own USB controller, my mistake[/update]

[linkboy]

22 minutes ago, Delphi1662 said:

so most of this flies over my head what does this mean for me as an owner ? what kind of precautions do i need to keep on a lookout for as far as third party stuff?

The best bet is to use Nintendo's dock. Don't use any of the 3rd party ones. 

 

I've charged my dock in portable mode via my dual-port Google USB-C charger (the one they released during the Nexus 6p) and RAVpower battery back without any issues, but I've only plugged the dock in with the original cord that came with my system.

[AresKrieger]

It basically functions as a power cable so it really isn't relevant tbh, it has a headphone jack after all.

[Sniperfox47]

10 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

I think the big issue with USB Type-C is that it is still too new. The standard wasn't set in stone while many companies worked on the implementation of it in its device. In the original findings the author suggests that a hardware change is needed to solve this. The problem is that there is no hardware beside the SoC. So the issue is with the Tegra X1 chip the system uses. Probably it only supported part of USB Type-C, and Nintendo went with that... that is just my guess.

https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Nintendo+Switch+Teardown/78263

Quote

Pericom Semiconductor PI3USB30532 USB 3.0/DP1.2 matrix switch

That's the USB-C controller. The Tegra X1 has support for USB 3.0, not USB 3.1gen1 (yes at a hardware level there are actually some differences) so no CC support, no alt-mode support, and no power regulation support in the SoC. That chip above is used for handling data and the DisplayPort Alt-mode while a seperate chip (I believe the "Maxim Integrated MAX77620AEWJ+T PMIC" Edit: just found a datasheet for a sister product and doesn't appear it's these PMICs implementing PD. Not sure where on the device it's being implimented and I'm not about to teardown mine to find out xD) handling Power Delivery control. Ultimately the USB-C matrix switch and PMIC are both handling things not to standard.

[SeriousDad69]

Nintendo is alright at sofware but horrible at hardware lol so this isn't really a surprise. You mean, they're so bad that the Switch had mod chips in development with proof of concepts less than 10 months after being released(Being released by Team Xecuter within the next couple months btw). And there were the problems with JoyCon connectivity, the Switch gets hot and warps itself, it's easier than it should be to scratch it with the dock. People were even playing Breath of the Wild on hacked WII Us like a week before it and the Switch even came out lol

[TheRandomness]

On 30/03/2018 at 11:09 PM, GoodBytes said:

I think the big issue with USB Type-C is that it is still too new. The standard wasn't set in stone while many companies worked on the implementation of it in its device. In the original findings the author suggests that a hardware change is needed to solve this. The problem is that there is no hardware beside the SoC. So the issue is with the Tegra X1 chip the system uses. Probably it only supported part of USB Type-C, and Nintendo went with that... that is just my guess.

Speaking of the SOC, some data miners or whatever you want to call them found a new hardware id in the latest update, so I'm assuming there's going to be a silent hardware update to the Switch in the coming future.

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Speaking of the SOC, some data miners or whatever you want to call them found a new hardware id in the latest update, so I'm assuming there's going to be a silent hardware update to the Switch in the coming future.

I can all but guarantee that it's going to get an updated version with more storage. The Switches out now, use a socketted PCB for the NAND, it's not directly soldered on.

 

It's possible that that Hardware ID is for a higher capacity variant.

Or we're getting what is as to the Switch as the Xbone S is to the Xbone.

[TheRandomness]

5 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

I can all but guarantee that it's going to get an updated version with more storage. The Switches out now, use a socketted PCB for the NAND, it's not directly soldered on.

 

It's possible that that Hardware ID is for a higher capacity variant.

Or we're getting what is as to the Switch as the Xbone S is to the Xbone.

Do not quote me on this but I heard that it was a new SOC id, so do with that what you will. And would they really need a new SOC id for a socketed replacement? Also, I could see them making a double-sized PCB with more than double the chips.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, TheRandomness said:

Do not quote me on this

Too late.

 

1 minute ago, TheRandomness said:

I heard that it was a new SOC id, so do with that what you will. And would they really need a new SOC id for a socketed replacement? Also, I could see them making a double-sized PCB with more than double the chips.

That'd probably fall under the second option, after storage upgrade.

[AlTech]

Typo in the Thread Title

 

*Compliant

[Nowak]

On 3/30/2018 at 6:09 PM, GoodBytes said:

I think the big issue with USB Type-C is that it is still too new. The standard wasn't set in stone while many companies worked on the implementation of it in its device. In the original findings the author suggests that a hardware change is needed to solve this. The problem is that there is no hardware beside the SoC. So the issue is with the Tegra X1 chip the system uses. Probably it only supported part of USB Type-C, and Nintendo went with that... that is just my guess.

 

[update]It has its own USB controller, my mistake[/update]

The issue is that Nintendo completely screwed up their implementation of USB-PD. The Switch should not request a 0.5a contract then immediately violate that contract and draw way more power. That can damage both the console itself and the charger, and we've seen it happen before.

[Sniperfox47]

2 minutes ago, Daring said:

The issue is that Nintendo completely screwed up their implementation of USB-PD. The Switch should not request a 0.5a contract then immediately violate that contract and draw way more power. That can damage both the console itself and the charger, and we've seen it happen before.

To be fair it is not *Nintendo* themselves who did the implimentations. The controller chip manufacturers are the ones who designed the hardware and firmware that actually impliments both the DisplayPort Alt-mode and Power Delivery.

 

With how early the development of the Nintendo switch started it's likely they just picked the first USB/DP matrix switch chip and USB Power Delivery chip available on the market for their prototypes, didn't encounter issues themselves, and just rolled with it not realizing the chips had problems.

 

The more I look into this issue, the more it looks like an unfortunate accident due to controller choice, rather than anything intentional or even due to negligence.

[Tech22]

On 3/30/2018 at 3:09 AM, Evanair said:

The brick isn't USB-C complaint either.  Mine (when I had a switch) would charge the switch just fine, but other USB devices couldn't charge off it at all, they wouldn't detect anything plugged into them.

The only USB-C charger that I own that works on the switch was the Pixel 1 XL charger that came included with it

[GoodBytes]

58 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

To be fair it is not *Nintendo* themselves who did the implimentations. The controller chip manufacturers are the ones who designed the hardware and firmware that actually impliments both the DisplayPort Alt-mode and Power Delivery.

 

With how early the development of the Nintendo switch started it's likely they just picked the first USB/DP matrix switch chip and USB Power Delivery chip available on the market for their prototypes, didn't encounter issues themselves, and just rolled with it not realizing the chips had problems.

 

The more I look into this issue, the more it looks like an unfortunate accident due to controller choice, rather than anything intentional or even due to negligence.

Perhaps, but they pick the chip in the end.

 

I don't Nintendo cared as:

 - Works fine with batteries banks

 - Works fine with their own accessories as they can make it work.

 

The problem, is that people are getting accessories NOT designed for the Switch, and the manufacture, who claims that it works for the Switch, didn't not even bother testing anything. They saw it kinda works, packaged it, and call it a day. No R&D. Max profit. That is the big issue.

 

The lesser issue, but still an issue, if you use a USB Type C power adapter instead of Nintendo one (say you need to charge it and you don't have the adapter as you forgot it, it may cause problems). But that is less of an issue, as all the issues of broken Switch's was due to these third parties docks not licensed by Nintendo.

[D13H4RD]

On 3/29/2018 at 11:32 PM, M.Yurizaki said:

To keep things proprietary while using an existing connector of course :3

Which explains why the Moto and Xiaomi dongle only work with their respective phones.

 

Doesn't work at all on my Note8, Honor 8P and my laptop.

[Sniperfox47]

4 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

Which explains why the Moto and Xiaomi dongle only work with their respective phones.

 

Doesn't work at all on my Note8, Honor 8P and my laptop.

Don't know for sure about Xiaomi, but 100% sure the Motorola one is just using "USB Audio Adapter Accessory Mode" which is a standard mode in the USB spec that allows a phone to output an analog audio signal over the Type-C port.

 

It's not a proprietary spec. It's just a part of the standard that's optional, and which Google discourages companies from implimenting on Android phones due to the exact confusion you mentioned.

[D13H4RD]

Just now, Sniperfox47 said:

Don't know for sure about Xiaomi, but 100% sure the Motorola one is just using "USB Audio Adapter Accessory Mode" which is a standard mode in the USB spec that allows a phone to output an analog audio signal over the Type-C port.

 

It's not a proprietary spec. It's just a part of the standard that's optional, and which Google discourages companies from implimenting on Android phones due to the exact confusion you mentioned.

I think Mi does the same. I have a feeling it's done so because it is simple.

[HarryNyquist]

1 hour ago, Sniperfox47 said:

It's just a part of the standard that's optional...

Standardization is all-or-none. Either something complies with a standard, or it doesn't. The whole point of a standard is to avoid confusion. That's half the damn reason we have a billion standards, someone implements an "optional" part of another standard, and standardizes it.

[bcredeur97]

just a thought...

 

if they made it compatible... the thing would probably be a lot more hackable. so to avoid extra work to stop that, they just made the port not work with anything normal.

[GoodBytes]

54 minutes ago, bcredeur97 said:

just a thought...

 

if they made it compatible... the thing would probably be a lot more hackable. so to avoid extra work to stop that, they just made the port not work with anything normal.

I don't think that is the reason. Else, they can make it own connector... it's not like Nintendo is new to it. In fact, having Nintendo use a standard connector is definitely new. Nintendo, LOVES, to have complete control of everything to ensure the expected experience to the user. The thing is that we know nothing about USB Type-C. It could have been designed this way, to make it support future accessories which may or may not be ever released (see NES, SNES, N64, and GameCube with its 3 ports under it), while keeping cost low. We just don't know. Or it might be, simply, that Nintendo genuinely didn't implement USB Type-C properly.  Maybe it is lack of time issue due to the WiiU not doing well, and may be fixed in future models (or maybe not, if they want the keep the same dock and power adapter).

 

All it means in the end, if that you need to look for genuinely supported/tested Switch USB Type-C peripherials, and companies can't just randomly slap something together and act like if they did someone thing big, while nothing was done beside the "slapping together" part, and charges you a high price like if it had to repay R&D but has none to repay.

[Sniperfox47]

4 hours ago, HarryNyquist said:

Standardization is all-or-none. Either something complies with a standard, or it doesn't. The whole point of a standard is to avoid confusion. That's half the damn reason we have a billion standards, someone implements an "optional" part of another standard, and standardizes it.

The whole point of standardization is interoperability, not the avoidance of confusion...

 

And *TONS* of standards have optional parts...

 

IRC has optional parts(most of the advanced commands, user modes, etc.)

 

802.11AC has optional parts (MU-MIMO, 160MHz channels, and all the other features typically marketed as "Wave 2")

 

EXT file system has optional parts (Journalling and extended file information, among others)

 

Optional parts of a spec are nothing new, and for something like USB-C where there there's actually a physical hardware cost to implimenting them, you won't see as many devs implimenting all the options. Sorry.

[GoodBytes]

Update:

Nintendo Japan webpage says that if you use USB-A to USB-C charging cable with your switch safe as long as it has a 56K OHM resistor. Basically, a good USB cable (which, those, should have the 56 OHM resistor in it already), is recommended to charge your Switch with external power source.

 

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2018/04/nintendo_has_detailed_the_usb_cables_you_can_use_to_safely_charge_your_switch#comments

[Sniperfox47]

16 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Update:

Nintendo Japan webpage says that if you use USB-A to USB-C charging cable with your switch safe as long as it has a 56K OHM resistor. Basically, a good USB cable (which, those, should have the 56 OHM resistor in it already), is recommended to charge your Switch with external power source.

 

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2018/04/nintendo_has_detailed_the_usb_cables_you_can_use_to_safely_charge_your_switch#comments

Which is completely irrelevant to this issue, since a type-A to Type-C cable is not going to support Power Delivery which is what this whole thing has been about. In fact, if you're using a Type-A power output, the switch will continue to drain faster than the 10.5W input can charge it.

 

This issue is not a matter of the cable, but with the switch incorrectly responding to the protocol used to negotiate faster charging.