I did watch the whole thing, but IMO the small caveats they added towards the end were simply far, far, far too little and too late, being entirely overshadowed by both what is said previously in the video as well as how the people involved are acting. They never truly highlighted how different thunderbolt is from regular USB, never expanded on the difference between active and passive cables (and, for example, the existence of passive short length TB cables), and barely mentioned the fact that those USB 2.0 cables are entirely standards compliant - just to a different standard. The exclusions were IMO extremely selective in favor of an overall framing along the lines of “this is how a proper high-tech cable is made, this other stuff is just ridiculous and borderline junk”, which is extremely misleading. Yes, they did highlight that high amperage USB 2.0 type-C cables are what most people most likely need (for charging laptops and phones), but the amount of time given to this vs. extolling the (implicitly universally applicable, which is quite misleading) virtues of the TB cable essentially drowned that out entirely. Not to mention that comparing the highest bandwidth cables available to the lowest is … rather boring? Why not look at what is needed for TB3/4 vs., for example, 5/10/20Gbps USB 3.x? Or even 40Gbps USB4 cables? There’s so much potential for a super informative and interesting video here, and instead they just made this weirdly sensationalist and tabloid-like “ha ha look how shit the cheap cables are, and how good this one is” video.
1 Like
