You’re getting a lot of “hot take” and sarcastic responses, but the actual answer is that they do. To use any of the USB-IF logos (including the official ones that clarify power and signal compatibility) a product has to go through the certification process: https://www.usb.org/logo-license

USB-IF also maintains a list of products that are certified: https://www.usb.org/products

The question then is, “Why is this still confusing?”. The answer is probably that the popular retail and e-commerce channels are flooded with products that aren’t certified, and consumers don’t realize that a certification process even exists.

This is really helpful. Thanks.

I've bought some supposedly USB-IF certified cables a couple of weeks ago and I didn't notice the logos. When I get home tonight, I'm going to take a closer look.

Why stop a labeling? You could design the connectors to only terminate at another connector that supports the same features, preventing anyone from confusing one cable for another.

And the reason we don't do that is because it would expose the lie that there can be a universal data and power connector for all devices, and rather than live in a world where everything can connect perfectly fine with the right cables, we have chosen to live in one where the market can be flooded with garbage cables that don't work for your devices. And rather than blame the device manufacturer for choosing a shoddy cable, or the government for forcing them to, we can happily blame the cable manufacturer instead.

If you just slap a label on it, it's not going to fix the problem. No one is going to read them, and people are going to lie.

I think you’re letting perfect be the enemy of good here.

I understand its a bit of a hot take but I just fundamentally disagree with the premise that we should be using one connector for such a wide range of devices. It's a recipe for garbage.

Considering most people that encounter USB cables these days is for the purposes of charging some device, and a smaller minority will actually care about optimizing the charging speed, the universal connector solves a lot of the important usability problems even if it creates other kind of problems. Engineering is about trade offs and while separate connectors might make you personally happy, it would probably result in more expensive devices and cables that have even worse interop (the more generic the hw can be, the cheaper it is at scale).

I think the logos would be helpful but I doubt anything will happen in that direction because the benefit is likely marginal.

> it would expose the lie that there can be a universal data and power connector for all devices

It was never promised for ALL devices. Obviously, there are high power applications where type-C connector would melt no matter what you do.

But it's quite obvious that USB-C cables with 40Gbps and 100W power delivery exist. And it's good enough for most devices. At least for now.

I even see 40Gbps cables with 240W PD.

> And the reason we don't do that is because it would expose the lie that there can be a universal data and power connector for all devices

And yet, such a connector and cable does exist!

> everything can connect perfectly fine with the right cables

Right, because carrying 3 different cables to give a presentation, which I wont be able to if I forget one of them, or it gets too bent in my backpack is indeed "perfectly fine". As opposed to carrying just 1 USB-C cable (which as a bonus I can use to charge my Android phone in case the battery unexpectedly starts running out before the end of the day) and even if it gets damaged or broken, odds are increasingly that there will be several other people who will also have that cable.

> rather than blame the device manufacturer for choosing a shoddy cable, or the government for forcing them to, we can happily blame the cable manufacturer instead

And we can't do that with universal cables because?

Because the USB Consortium is partially made up of the same companies that make garbage cables.

There used to be a thing where cables that supported usb-3 had blue interiors to their connectors. But then some jackasses started shipping crap cables with blue connectors at inflated prices...

I don't think the usb standards body can realisticly police the labeling in any real way.

Also apple's usb-c cables w/ thunderbolt has the little thunderbolt icon on it, so at least they are labeling it (https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MN713AM/A/thunderbolt-4-u...)

Isn’t that how we got USB 3 Gen 2 PD 130w Muffin-Spec?

Their names are terrible.

Besides. If companies are going to make non-conforming cables, they can put fake labels on them too. No normal person is going to check for the right labels.

They need a “USB C 4 cable”. They type that into Amazon and buy the thing with a low price and 4 stars.

The exact markings on the cable don’t make a difference.

You can probably blame the manufacturers and tech press for that.

These were always only intended to be internal designations for very specific technologies, with the devices and cables simply labeled with their actual capabilities. None of the Gen1/Gen2/Gen3 nonsense, simply "10G" / "20G" / "40G".

Unfortunately not everyone got that memo, and once the general population got used to the complicated internal-only designation it became pretty much impossible to use any other term for it.