I feel that all of this would be MUCH less of a problem with simple code that are required on each USB cable with the exact specs it supports. This code could be put into a tool which then decodes to show what exactly that cable supports.
This works until some mgf decides it's easier to claim to support everything, ships a simple controller that does that, it gets widely used, and a lot of harware becomes mysteriously incompatible as a result.
Trusting vendors to be honest in declaring capabilities is not always the best of all possible approaches, historically.
As I understand it, one of the reasons earlier iterations of the USB standard were popular with manufacturers was that it was logistically and administratively easy. You didn't have to license a bunch of expensive patents and certification is quite easy.
Going against that might be possible, but it strikes me as perhaps difficult to get implementors to go along with.
Do you really think a Chinese manufacturer of cheap cables cares if they’re displaying various logos with the proper license or not otherwise misleading customers? Look up the whole “CE” vs “China Export” thing...
What's strange is that stuff gets imported and sold in the west. It used to be illegal and you couldn't get pirate products in shops but now Amazon somehow just does it flagrantly. Doesn't customs ever seize a container of cables with the wrong logos on them anymore?
The problem is that you don't know if the logo is valid. Anyone can just print it on their product. Even buying from Amazon won't save you all the time.
When it so blatantly doesn't work, it'll get called out in reviews and possibly delisted. It's really easy to stamp the actual capacity on a cable, and there's not much incentive to lie.
With a mix of capabilities, it may not be as simple as "doesn't work". Imagine a cable that 95% of reviewers say work just fine, but 5% say doesn't work at all. Maintains a 4.7 star rating or whatever.
I'm suggesting that they could mostly do fine with lying blatantly about capabilities in hardware. It would take very close analysis to find that it only had some of the capabilities advertised.
I would agree with this idea… except device manufacturers can't even manage to not put the port in backwards, or print the labeling on the wrong side of the connector. (Yes, the standard mandates a particular orientation for the ports. But there's so many non-compliant devices out there, good luck knowing that.) I don't think they'd get such a thing even remotely close. There's just too much low quality crap out there.
