[Attack of the Cables!] 18th #USB #TypeC analysis: Plugable USB3.1Gen2 USB-IF Certified eMarked C-C cable. [Model USBC-C100]
tl;dr: GOOD. Properly eMarked 3A, USB-IF certified, economical, good support. High IR drop could be improved.


[PDF of Cable Checklist for Plugable USBC-C100]
(These analyses will be a lot shorter, and rapid-fire. READ THE PDF.)

Here's a question: if manufacturers everywhere are breaking the rules, and you find a name-brand cable that is decent, cheap, reliable, and has good support -- do you go for it? Or push your luck? (Shopping mall parking hypothesis.)

This cable lies perfectly within USB-IF Specifications. It is properly USB-IF certified and eMarked, and the company itself is "honorable", for lack of a better word. But I will point out two hiccups in the design:


First, the "Product ID" field in the eMarker on some cables appears to be "Zero". If you are a computer guy/gal you know what "zero indexing" is. But do product numbers allow the same rules? To my eyes, "zero is a number" so it's OK, as long as it's unique and never re-used for another product. However, poorly-coded USB-C devices might scan the eMarker, see a zeroed out "Product number" field, and naively assume it's not there. So it's something to be aware of.


Second, the IR drop causes some charging issues on the Google Nexus 6P. (More on this in another post, later.) This is allowed for in the USB-C spec, and Plugable is doing everything by the rules. But again, a "problem device" that isn't following the rules is having trouble.

So if you want an USB3.1Gen2 cord "just to have", or for general use -- I recommend grabbing this since it is reliable and *literally* half the cost of the Belkin.

Details/proof in the PDF report.
[Plus] Analyses Plugable USBC-C100
2 Photos - View album
Shared publiclyView activity