I love USB Type-C. The I/O specification is physically compact, reversible, universal, and capable of pushing a significant amount of data and power through its system. When compared to USB Type-A, USB Micro-B, and the litany of other legacy USB ports that were once more prominent on the market, Type-C streamlines connectivity to a great degree.

Of course, nothing in life is perfect, and USB-C too suffers from its own set of deficiencies. You see, Type-C refers to the physical port design itself, and not the underlying technology that powers the port. With this in mind, there are a variety of (admittedly confusing) standards and specifications that run on top of USB-C, ranging from USB 2.0 (up to 480 Mbps) to USB4 Version 2.0 (up to 120 Gbps).

Further muddying the waters is the Intel-backed Thunderbolt specification, which sits parallel but not in place of other USB bandwidth standards. Then there’s USB Power Delivery (PD), as well as a variety of proprietary power delivery technologies that can all tap into the world of USB-C.

The problem here isn’t that there are various data and charging technologies compatible with USB-C, but rather that it’s difficult to discern which cable and which port is capable of which attribute. USB-C doesn’t mandate color-coding, nor does it enforce written Gbps or wattage labels. In other words, several years into its introduction to market, USB-C is a bit of a free for all.

Not all USB-C ports are the same

Some Type-C sockets are already woefully outdated

Of note is that the majority of cheaper USB Type-C cables are of the 2.0 variety, which equates to a measly 0.48 Gbps of bandwidth throughput. This is hardly enough data prowess to transfer modern files at a reasonable speed, and it’s a bottleneck that applies even if your devices are technically capable of faster transfers.

Likewise, many Type-C ports found on a range of products are 2.0, meaning that they’re woefully outdated from a technological standpoint. The USB 2.0 specification was released by the USB Implementers Forum all the way back in April 2000, making it a legacy protocol that has stuck around in the modern USB-C era.

For example, Apple’s latest iPhone 17 flagship is still limited to USB 2.0 data transfer speeds, as is the iPhone Air. You’ll need to shell out for a Pro iPhone model to unlock 10Gbps USB 3 speeds. For as high-tech as the iPhone 17 is, it’s hamstrung by a decades-old and highly antiquated I/O specification.

Display output matters

Looking towards the future

Adding another wrinkle to USB Type-C’s port confusion, not all USB-C ports feature wired display output compatibility, and it’s difficult to know which ports do and which don’t. Display out is useful to have, as it means you can connect your compatible Type-C-clad phone, tablet, or laptop directly to a monitor or television set for expanded screen real estate.

Modern Macs and PCs generally support display out, as do higher-end iPads and some Android phones and tablets. If your smart device doesn’t feature USB-C display out, then you’re missing out on the ability to transform it into a pseudo computer. Some portable game consoles also feature display out, like the Nintendo Switch 2 and the Asus ROG Xbox Ally, while others like the Nintendo Switch Lite simply do not, which is a bummer.

USB-C needs reform

Clearer labels, color coding, and the phasing out of 2.0 speeds

I reckon USB Type-C is in need of a reformation. USB-A-style color coding would be a great place to start, but I would also welcome standardized on-cable data bandwidth and wattage labels with open arms. Down the line, I’d love to see USB 2.0 be phased out in its entirety, as it’s simply too low-specced for the modern era. Likewise, USB-C display out as a standardized feature across the board would win my heart, especially as more and more devices have the software optimizations needed for big-screen workflows.

Pragmatically, I think Type-C’s mess of standards and specifications is here to stay. In the grand scheme of things, a theoretical USB-D is probably necessary to sort out the confusion by starting entirely fresh. It’s certainly a shame that many of the USB-C ports on devices and many of the USB-C cables in drawers across the globe are subject to early obsolescence due to their lack of technological underpinnings. That being said, I still love Type-C for what it is — I just wish it went that little bit further in its vision for the future.