
Why Was Mini USB Deprecated in Favor of Micro USB? - liyanage
https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/18552/why-was-mini-usb-deprecated-in-favor-of-micro-usb
======
AcerbicZero
This is a great answer, but for some reason the author left out the most
obvious of reasons. Mini-USB put the mechanical strain of the connection on
the socket side, while Micro-USB puts that strain on the cable side. Since its
much easier to toss a cable vs remove and solder in a new socket connector the
average cycle lifetime became much less critical in general.

~~~
megaremote
I don't see how that can be true:
[https://i2.wp.com/www.cheapharddrivesstorage.com/wp-
content/...](https://i2.wp.com/www.cheapharddrivesstorage.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/04/c-appleus-lightning-smartphone-cable-type-_micro-usb-
vs-mini-usb-c-appleus-lightning-connector-smartphone-cable-to-hdmi-cables-u-
adapters.jpg)

~~~
duskwuff
The photo below "Micro USB" is not Micro USB. The connector shown there looks
more like a USB Mini-A socket.

A real USB Micro socket looks like this:
[https://cf.ydcdn.net/latest/images/computer/_MICUSB.GIF](https://cf.ydcdn.net/latest/images/computer/_MICUSB.GIF)

------
ChuckMcM
And for those who disbelieve the 'it isn't reliable' story, I've got some
worthless evaluation boards you can have where the mini-USB plug will no
longer reliably hold on to a USB cable. Not a data set I realize, but I was
glad when people switched to micro which has proven more reliable for me.

Of course lightning was better still but alas Apple wasn't going to share that
with the world so we have USB C.

~~~
gumby
> Of course lightning was better still but alas Apple wasn't going to share
> that with the world so we have USB C.

Apple was a major contributor to the Type C design, and learning from the
limitations of lighting were reflected in its design.

Like you I really like the small profile of lightning, but the design of the
Type C connector does have two important advantages thanks to its shell/shroud
design:

1 - The "springy" piece that deforms is the cable not the receptacle. That
means when the connection becomes flimsy this is more likely to be the
replaceable cables (though some of the cables can be pricy, it's likely still
cheaper than replacing the device)

2 - the shroud is ground and is longer than the pins, thus you have a ground
connection before you get to any signal or power (like the longer ground pin
in UK and Schuko connectors. This doesn't matter much for a USB2 cable but is
a safety issue when you have 100W on the cable.

And back to Apple: much as lightning is good for them, it isn't really an
instrument of MFI enforcement; they can enforce that just as well with type C.
They already have type C iPads so I expect they'll gradually abandon
lightning. The iPod 30-pin connector lasted about 9 years and lightning is 7
years old so this isn't unreasonable. And I believe it would make the EU
happy.

~~~
DannyBee
"Apple was a major contributor to the Type C design"

Citation?

As far as i know, it was created almost entirely by a team at Google, and the
agreement to get Apple on board was to not publicize this fact. Which is
really sad, because then John Gruber then went off and credited their work to
Apple without bothering to fact check it.

IIRC, Apple was not even at the USB meeting where it was first presented.

I'm sure post coming on board Apple contributed, but yeah.

(Various xooglers and others have confirmed all this publicly now, AFAIK)

~~~
bigdubs
One interesting data point (though I really don't care where this all leads):

18 of the 79 named engineers worked for Apple.

[https://www.docdroid.net/uf3z/typec.pdf](https://www.docdroid.net/uf3z/typec.pdf)

My sense is the spec was designed by a consortium and no one company owns it,
but I would bet Apple did contribute lessons from lightning to it.

------
joezydeco
Mini/Micro USB also suffers from a superposition rule* much like the A
connector: whenever you need a mini or micro cable, your drawer will be
completely full of the opposite type.

* [https://imgur.com/gallery/kYGTLjc](https://imgur.com/gallery/kYGTLjc)

~~~
city41
mini usb is basically extinct in my house. But now I’ve got the same conundrum
with micro and usb-c. Oh what I wouldn’t give for one connector to rule them
all.

~~~
majewsky
There are still new devices being sold with Mini-USB sockets, e.g. the
handheld audio recorders by Zoom. (They plug into USB to function as external
sound cards.)

------
AdmiralAsshat
Strange. My PS3 has been in regular use since 2011 or so (the console itself
being a used launch model from 2008), and I don't recall the mini-USB port on
the controller ever failing to charge. I suppose I'd have to check the serial
number on the controller, though, to see if it's actually _that_ one that came
with the console--I may have switched it out with one that I bought later for
multiplayer purposes without realizing it.

The controller only gets charged once every three weeks or so, now that I
think about it, so it could well still be under that failure threshold.

~~~
alias_neo
I have to agree, again, anecdotally. I have Mini cables and devices that have
been in use for well over a decade. I've never in my life had a Mini cable
fail on me.

I've had countless Micro cables fail on me electro-mechanically. Usually
either the latch fails, not a huge deal, but not great, or the contacts
"flatten" or don't contact any more.

I've lost so many that I've taken to cutting the bad connectors off and
soldering new ones on since I have the tools and the skills, and I don't buy
cheap cables (in the hope they'll last longer) so the rest of it is usually
worth saving.

~~~
dwaite
The original mini-b port was rated for 1000 insertion MTBF (I swear one
friend's cellphones were closer to 500, as they were going through 3 a year.)

It was revised to fail at 5000 MTBF, much more acceptable for something that
may be plugged in multiple times a day.

Micro USB was rated I believe at 10k MTBF, and moved the faily bits to the
cable.

The USB-IF obsoleted the Mini-A and Mini-AB plugs at that point (which are
really only used for USB-OTG, which is rare). They still let the 5k MTBF mini
sockets get certified on new devices, however.

~~~
alias_neo
I'm aware of the ratings, I'm just trying to say that in my experience, no
matter what the numbers say, reality has proved the opposite for me, I've had
far more (some number I've not counted, but, in the order of dozens) Micro
ports/plugs fail on my than I've had Mini ones fail (none, ever).

------
ebg13
I'm skeptical. Hands up anyone who hasn't had dozens of micro USB cables fail
on them because of the connector?

~~~
jpm_sd
That's the new trade-off. The cable plug fails instead of the socket on the
device. Cables are cheap.

~~~
opencl
The cable plug is _supposed_ to fail instead of the socket on the device.
Actual testing[1] demonstrates that the microUSB socket on the device does not
last the rated 10k cycles and also that the cable lasts longer than the socket
on the device.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqtNleXhTRE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqtNleXhTRE)

TL;DW- Repeated insertion and removal led to the socket on the microUSB SSD
failing after 8000 cycles, cable was still fine. USB-C still worked after 8000
cycles.

~~~
silversconfused
That video tested insertions, which is not the only type of abuse phones take.
Falling, being shoved into poor angles, being removed from charging at a
suboptimal angle (eg, walking away with it plugged in), for example are more
common causes of phone cord failure in microusb.

------
meuk
Broken mini USB connectors are a pet peeve of mine. I literaly threw away my
last three phones for the single reason the mini USB port wouldn't hold on to
any cable anymore.

This doesn't bother most other people, but I like to use my phone for longer
than 2-3 years. I really don't see the point in buying a marginally faster
phone every other year. It's wasteful for the environment and costs a lot of
money.

~~~
icebraining
Mini or micro? I don't remember phones with mini-USB ports.

~~~
duskwuff
Micro-USB was only introduced in 2007, and was uncommon before 2010 or so.
Before it was available, most phones either used mini-USB or proprietary
connectors.

------
donatj
I've heard this many times. I have never had a mini USB plug or cable fail.
I've had a couple micros fail on me in cheap devices.

The future I fear is far worse, my current phone, OnePlus 5t has the second
failed USB-C port, my previous being a Google Pixel. USB-C cables connections
in my experience become weak after maybe 50-100 uses.

I never had a single problem with a long line of micro phones.

~~~
shaklee3
I've had a Nexus 6p going on 4 years. Used the same cable the whole time.
Maybe you're using cheap cables?

------
equalunique
_I was involved in discussions and part of the decision loop. Then a very big
and leading mobile phone maker asked for it, even designed most part with a
leading connector maker. USB IF eventually bite the bullet and accepted.
Probably 2B+ of these connectors are shipped to date._

Frank's answer, given in 2011, seemed most interesting to me. Scroll a little
further and he names Nokia as the driving force.

------
neonscribe
USB-C has its issues, but it is clearly better than any previous connector.

~~~
akvadrako
It’s not - I had the new MBP and every day had issues with USB-C devices
coming loose and losing connections. A connector that comes disconnected with
the smallest movement is not that good.

~~~
SketchySeaBeast
Didja get lint in there? I'm incredibly impressed with the USB-based products
I've dealt with.

~~~
scottlamb
That's been the problem for me. I couldn't use my Pixel 3's USB-C port for
charging or data anymore, until yesterday I finally dug out a shocking amount
of pocket lint. Compressed air and a vacuum didn't do it. And it's hard to
find a tool that will fit in there. My toothpicks were too thick. The end of a
zip tie (as suggested on some reddit thread) works well for the long section
but not the ends. It's probably not advisable, but in the end I used a safety
pin.

~~~
devenson
I use a small slice of rigid, clear plastic packaging that you usually
discard. It's probably less than a half a millimeter thick.

~~~
FPGAhacker
That's a good idea.

------
shereadsthenews
Can we have a roundup of worst-ever computer connectors? I'll open with the
stupefyingly bad SCSI VHDCI connector, which was a teensy little thing with a
couple of tiny screws usually attached to a gigantic cable that weighed at
least a kilogram. These things never worked right without extra mechanical
supports.

~~~
martyvis
My new HP laptop has an RJ45 Ethernet socket where the key side is spring and
hinged. It's basically to allow the laptop to be slimmer. I'm a network
engineer so often have a need to connect to random patch cables. Half of the
plugs don't readily come out when depressing their tongue and i have had to
coax them out with a improvised tool.

~~~
eemil
To a degree, I can forgive the use of slim ethernet ports. Now that dual-band
wifi and widely compatible (USB-C) docking stations are common, it's not
essential to have one at all, for the majority of users

------
rasz
No such thing as one standard Mini USB. I worked at PC parts&accessories
supplier pre 2007 and we carried something like 5 proprietary variants of mini
USB.

The only way to match "mini" USB was to ask for particular brand or make
client bring the device with him. 5-pin, 4-pin, 8pin Nikon, 4pin Sony, etc. It
was a mess.

~~~
metaphor
I suppose that partially explains the historical revisions of this spec[1]
circa 2006, including new IP agreement and criteria for "mini" products.

[1]
[https://usb.org/sites/default/files/CabConn20.pdf](https://usb.org/sites/default/files/CabConn20.pdf)

------
csours
Slightly OT: why did it take so many iterations to get to USB-C?

~~~
Zak
Slightly more OT: why is USB-C adoption so slow?

Sure, your non-Apple smartphone or tablet almost certainly uses it, and maybe
your laptop, but anything else? Virtually any other random device that uses a
small USB port is far more likely to be micro-B than it is to be C even though
C has been common on smartphones for years.

~~~
jolmg
I think it's already insanely fast. If I remember right, it came out a little
after USB-3 and it's already has comparable adoption. Of course, it's not
going to go as fast as USB-3 since USB-C doesn't use backwards compatible
hardware. With regards to random devices that are not USB hosts, it's still
preferable to use USB-2 for greatest compatibility unless extra speed is
needed like on external storage drives.

~~~
Zak
The connector is the primary reason I'm eager for wider adoption. The C
connector is significantly more robust and doesn't require three attempts to
plug in.

It certainly makes sense that such a hardware change slows things down a bit,
but USB-C phones have been on the market since 2015 and pretty much standard
since not long after that. If I want a USB-C powerbank or flash drive, I
pretty much have to buy it online and I'll likely pay a premium for it. If
some newly-introduced device in 2019 uses a USB connector to charge its
integrated battery (a misfeature in itself if you ask me), it's almost never
USB-C.

In short, I don't expect existing product lines to get revised, I expected to
see USB-C show up faster on new products that aren't phones or tablets.

~~~
jolmg
> If some newly-introduced device in 2019 uses a USB connector to charge its
> integrated battery (a misfeature in itself if you ask me), it's almost never
> USB-C.

Because there's a much smaller market of people that have enough USB-C hosts
so that they're able to make full use of such devices. I, for one, don't have
a single device with USB-C. In fact, only my company laptop has USB-3;
everything else is USB-2. I don't think I'm an outlier on this.

> but USB-C phones have been on the market since 2015 and pretty much standard
> since not long after that.

On new models, yes, but for many it makes more financial sense to buy phones 2
or 3 generations back to avoid the premiums of having "the latest and
greatest", and those are still microUSB. For example, the latest Motorola
phone in the G-family is the G7, and the G5 is microUSB. So, there's still a
lot of people buying phones with microUSB.

~~~
Zak
You don't need new hardware for a USB A-to-C cable to be more convenient than
a USB A-to-micro-B cable. Almost any scenario benefits from the improved
connector.

But there's a cost to switch of being in adapter hell until the market catches
up. I'm in that situation, with a USB-C phone, but various micro-B devices I
can't find C replacements for.

------
kabacha
> The micro-USB connector was designed with these past failings in mind and
> has a rated lifetime of about 10,000 insertion cycles

I find it hard to believe that. Micro-USB in my experience has been the most
unreliable cable type I've ever had. Doesn't matter if it's an expensive one
that came with your premium phone or a chinese one from alibaba - something
breaks with then within a year of casual use.

~~~
theclaw
It’s the socket that’s rated, not the cable.

------
Causality1
I can only speak from personal experience, but Mini-B female connectors had a
truly incredible propensity for breaking loose off the board they were
soldered to, and the male connectors bent inward at the slightest pressure.

Granted type-C isn't much better in the latter regard, I've thrown out
multiple cables after finding they somehow got squished flat.

------
ggm
Apple isn't always that kind of company, but would lightning have been a
mechanically simpler cable than USB-C? (I mean, wouldn't have given up the
market and patent dominance in the interests of an industry wide non-
discriminatory standard. They did some things as sensible cross patents but I
don't think they always do)

------
0b0001
How likely is it to accidentally rip off the inner part of sockets?

It happens, I know that from personal experience. But how does compare with
the wear during normal use?

Type C and Lightning nearly look like plug & socket components. I understand
type C moved the springs to the plug. But how often do people rip out the
socket?

------
TheGRS
Scroll down past the accepted answer and you see what is likely the real one.
A manufacturer came to the standardization board with a new design, asked for
it, probably lobbied them for it greatly, and they eventually accepted it.
Reasons for why the manufacturer wanted this aren't stated, I'm sure its a mix
of engineering ideas, wishes, dreams and some mix of gaining an upper-hand in
whatever market was there at the time.

Obligatory XKCD: [https://xkcd.com/927/](https://xkcd.com/927/)

------
Izkata
I have an alternate theory, based on something the comments over there
reminded me of:

Back in the mini-usb era, most of my family bought Razr phones. All of them
broke in various ways in under a year (one actually snapped in half), because
they weren't very careful about handling the phones. Nowadays, new phones last
several years and are usually upgraded instead of needing replacement after
breaking.

For most of my family, those phones were the first small electronics they had
that they kept on them. But my dad had a Blackberry before that, and I had a
GBA - we never had issues breaking our "fragile" phones.

I think mini-usb was deemed fragile compared to micro-usb because a
significantly larger proportion of the population didn't know how to handle
them, and the manufacturers/etc identified the wrong problem.

~~~
closetohome
> But my dad had a Blackberry before that, and I had a GBA - we never had
> issues breaking our "fragile" phones.

I think this is a really interesting point. I see so many people complain
about "fragile" smartphones, and whose phones always seem to have a cracked
screen.

Really it just comes down to taking care of your things, and treating
expensive electronics like expensive electronics.

~~~
zaat
Most expensive electronics are actually much more durable than smartphones,
and you usually not taking them with you wherever you go. I can handle
ceramics and crystal glasses just fine, but I don't take them with me when I
go hiking.

~~~
closetohome
I honestly can't think of any complex electronics I own that are more durable
than my iPhone. Nothing else is waterproof, for starters. And the phone has
survived some pretty gnarly drops and falls.

~~~
zaat
My Lenovo X1 yoga is way more durable than my phone. My kindle reader is too.
The multimedia head unit in my car is rock solid compared to my phone. My
keyboard, desktop PC, printer and scanner and screen are all more durable than
my phone.

perhaps many of those are less water resistant than the phone, but the most
common failure point I see in smartphones is their screen glass, and the
second is the stupid glass in the back, where applicable.

Not long ago I consulted restaurant reviews in front of a restaurant on my
then new phone. Country side, Italy. A big insect landed on my hand and
instinctively I dropped the phone on the pavement. The degree of damage that
incident left on the device is way beyond what is acceptable for common usage
of any other commonly used object. Even my sunglasses are more durable.

~~~
megaremote
> My Lenovo X1 yoga is way more durable than my phone. My kindle reader is
> too.

Neither of them are water proof, so how does that work?

~~~
dragonsky
You are not prone to drop either a notebook or a kindle reader in the
toilet.... Maybe just how the things are carried leads to a greater level of
exposure to a dunking.

------
lostphilosopher
After having two phones fail due to the mini connector I switched to only
wireless charging and I love it.

I understand the charging performance hit, but that's much more easily
mitigated than sketchy cords/ports.

------
RenRav
A lot of my old devices have mini connectors, they work, as does micro. I
think when the original iphone was released they just wanted something
thinner, anticipating future thin smart phones.

------
Glyptodon
My phones' micro-b ports pretty much become worn out in 1 year 10 months +/\-
every time. I hate to imagine how much worse it'd be.

------
RandomGuyDTB
Mini's still on my TI-84+ and I can only speak anecdotally but I've never had
a single cable die or have a socket go loose. I plugged and unplugged it
probably ten times a day last year for six months so I could work on making my
first calculator game.

I go through a micro-USB cable once a month. I buy them in bulk. I hate the
standard with a passion. I don't _like_ thin devices- if they could make
thicker phones that have mini I'd buy them instead.

~~~
rightbyte
Micro sockets get full with dust too and are really hard to clean. My last two
phones usb sockets died on me.

I got this feeling the mini is more robust. It got way better metal support
for the plug.

Edit: Couldnt remember which is which.

------
seaish
If you replace Mini USB with Micro USB and replace Micro USB with USB C, most
of the answer still makes sense.

------
itsaidpens
Reminder that Apple designed the USB-C connector, which is why it's so
friggin' user friendly!

~~~
gruez
Maybe, but it’s definitely worse than lightning when it comes to retention.
Usb-c comes loose with very little force.

~~~
Shorel
I find that a good feature to have.

Much better than dropping my phone or headphones to the floor as it happens
with the micro-USB cables.

------
bni
So in the time frame that Apple has switched connector once for the iPhone,
there has been at least 3 versions of small USB connectors (Not counting the
larger types here that are at least 2).

Usually Apple is the one scolded "for switching connectors every few years to
suck out more money" How come?

------
dmckeon
The real longevity plan for plugs is not X,000 cycles, but “Will it work until
I lose it?”

~~~
Macha
Depends on your use case I guess? I've never lost a micro usb cable but at
this stage I've had tens of them fail on me.

------
gowld
A lot of words to say the obvious answer: micro is smaller, and phones are
thinner now.

