
Amazon bans the sale of rogue USB-C cables - prostoalex
http://techcrunch.com/2016/03/29/amazon-bans-the-sale-of-rogue-usb-c-cables/
======
CPLX
Amazon has a genuine problem with their reputation brewing at this point.
Here's an example:

Try to buy replacement printer ink for a HP 8600 printer. This is a super
common machine sold on special in Costco and Best Buy, possibly the most
popular general purpose printer out there.

Seriously, go to Amazon's site and try to just buy some replacement cartridges
for it. The first result looks great, tons of reviews average almost five
stars, appears to be sold by Amazon and made by HP: [http://www.amazon.com/HP-
Magenta-Original-Cartridges-CR314FN...](http://www.amazon.com/HP-Magenta-
Original-Cartridges-CR314FN/dp/B005BZNE2A/ref=sr_1_1?s=office-
products&ie=UTF8&qid=1459336766&sr=1-1&keywords=hp+951)

Now scroll down and look at the top customer reviews. Something is going on
here. Are these real or refilled? Who exactly is selling them? OK go back to
search results and look again. But there isn't any entry that stands out as
obviously just made by HP and sold by Amazon, they all have similar problems.

Ugh. This of course happened to me the other day. I spent 10 minutes trying to
just figure out how to buy real OEM printer ink, gave up, and navigated over
to HP.com where aside from typing in all my info again, it was painless and
next day shipping was free.

This has become a _constant_ problem that Amazon has to fix.

The next exercise for the reader is to try to find a pair of genuine Apple OEM
headphones, the kind that come with the iPhone, that can be bought with actual
confidence. That should be the easiest online shopping task imaginable, but
it's literally _impossible_ at this point on Amazon. Not slightly frustrating,
impossible.

And don't get me started on the switch to USPS shipping.

Despite their seeming chokehold on online shopping, Amazon is vulnerable to
competition that can solve these kinds of problems.

~~~
coldpie
Their introducing non-Amazon sellers on Amazon.com has really put me off. When
I'm ordering from Amazon, I know I'm going to get what I paid for, shipped
quickly, with an easy returns process. If I wanted to compare seller ratings,
decide on trustworthiness vs price, etc etc I'd go to eBay. I really wish
there was some option to just turn the marketplace completely off when I know
I just want to buy from Amazon.

~~~
CPLX
> I really wish there was some option to just turn the marketplace completely
> off when I know I just want to buy from Amazon.

This actually would solve much of the problem. I've tried to figure out how to
do this. My theory was that limiting the search to sold by Amazon.com would
accomplish this, but it doesn't seem to actually work that way in practice.

It's possible also that the customer reviews are for all sellers of item X, so
that the strange mix of 5-star "yes this is real in real box" reviews with
1-star "this is fake in a white envelope" reviews when looking at item X is
due to some kind of aggregation of all sellers of item X, and not
individualized.

Either way it's a UX disaster.

~~~
ntpeters
Not sure, but I think checking "Prime Only" essentially accomplishes this
because you can only get Prime shipping on items sold or fulfilled by Amazon.
Obviously is only relevant to Prime users, but at least it's something.

~~~
CPLX
That's not it. There's a lot of marketplace sellers that use fulfilled by
Amazon and offer prime shipping.

~~~
hga
Using Amazon is more risky for them, though, for example, if Amazon kicks them
to the curb, which happens frequently with e.g. DVD sales, they have to pay
hefty money to either get their inventory back _or have Amazon destroy it_.

Me, I find that if I stick to sellers of enough age, quantity of sales, and a
96% or better rating, I'm very seldom disappointed.

~~~
coldpie
> if I stick to sellers of enough age, quantity of sales, and a 96% or better
> rating

This is exactly the calculus that I don't want to bother with.

~~~
hga
It's a simple enough algorithm that I find it worthwhile, given the value of
my time vs. dollars.

That said, I do all the Amazon purchasing for my ~80 year old parents.

------
cnvogel
Ok, this is all nice and true, but how would such a thing be handled in
practice? There's a difference between "Standards Compliant" and "Does not
work for me". Many of the standards compliant cables might work just fine for
a majority of users.

Most specifically, the typical non-conformance was a wrong resistor value
indicating that an A-to-C cable would be free to draw up to 3A from the A
socket. This was in violation of maximum current allowed on an A connector,
but I guess this is what many users appreciated, because it made the tablets
charge faster.

So, who gets to decide if a USB-C cable is nonconforming? Remember, we are not
talking about expensive industrial or laboratory equipment but $10 (or ceaper)
cables.

Do I get to send it back to Amazon if it doesn't work with my USB-C device
[which itself might be too picky, violating the standard] Or may I send it
back when I can show a non-conformance using proper test equipment, even
though the cable would work for most users? Does every vendor have to provide
a certificate for successful passing of a testsuite/measurement? -- Also keep
in mind that the specification doesn't only cover charge currents (which is
pretty much exclusively what Benson Leungh had tested).

And when I have demonstratively proven that a cable is dangerous, will Amazon
reimburse all buyers?

~~~
majewsky
> There's a difference between "Standards Compliant" and "Does not work for
> me". Many of the standards compliant cables might work just fine for a
> majority of users.

I'd assume that a USB-Type C recepticle embedded in a costly device, such as a
smartphone or notebook, is more likely to be manufactured by someone who
adheres to the specs, or at least strives to.

~~~
cnvogel
Yes, I had assumed such things in the past, too... ;-).

But of course you are right in general: A smartphone, notebook or tablet
manufactured will likely be built to stricter standards than a random cable
from a random Amazon seller. Nevertheless, "works with a good notebook" is
generally not a replacement for a proper acceptance test. -- Typically it will
be in favor of the marginally failing component, as standards always employ
some safety margins, and properly built hardware will be forgiving for
"slightly broken" cables. Such a cable may as well, and rightfully, fail with
any number of other perfectly standards compliant computers.

------
nxzero
My experience is that quality wise that OEM or "real" products offer better
quality, but the risk in general doesn't negate the extra expense of buying
the real thing; short-term this is, the half-life of non-real products is
unpredictable and given the life spans of USB cords it's increasely worth the
risk. Real issue is that complaint cables are over priced, and there no cheap
way to confirm if a cord is non-complaint or for the matter if a device is
complaint.

------
hollander
USB-C is good news for consumers and companies alike because it helps
standardize the very different kinds of ports and adaptors that tech firms
have traditionally used for their products. But low quality and cheap cables
have flooded the market, causing more harm than good by frying laptops and
phones so that they can’t be used again. Finally, it seems that major
distributors like Amazon are waking up to the issue and clamping down, but
there’s plenty more to be done as Leung noted.

------
DiabloD3
Generally, if the cable isn't made by Anker, Monoprice, or AmazonBasics, why
are you buying it?

~~~
fluxquanta
To your average consumer those names mean nothing (except for maybe
AmazonBasics, because "Amazon" is in there).

~~~
agumonkey
Question, is amazonbasics amazon.com or just a name trick that amazon.com
allows ?

~~~
hga
It is Amazon.com, and generally of high or at least good enough quality, but
you have to check the reviews.

Given that they have their logo on the items, they'd better be careful about
policing it.

~~~
agumonkey
Right, the logo matches too. So far it seems like a curated list of cheap
enough parts. No expectations of awesomeness just functional without hidden
strings.

