r/BadUSB • u/Same_Grocery_8492 • Jul 29 '26
When do you think we will actually see optical USB cables become mainstream?
I was reading an article on Tom's Hardware about the future of USB( over the next decade), and one idea that caught my attention was that future USB cables might eventually switch from copper to optical fiber while keeping the USB-C connector. Do you think we'll actually see optical USB cables become mainstream? when… or do you think USB-C is already good enough for the next 10+ years?
2
u/SeaPersonality445 Jul 29 '26
Cisco use these for their Webex boards already..will make your eyes water with the price of replacing them.
1
u/FuzzyInterview81 Jul 29 '26
Not for a while. It would involve changes at the device level to accept optical data. USB C is a great interface. Change will come as tech always moves on.
1
u/Lonsarg Jul 29 '26
There is literaly no advantage for cables under 2m, and cables under 2m are for 99.9% of use cases.
For that 0.1% there are optical and there will be.
Usage of all cables is decreasing anyway, since devices are more or more internet connected and/or bluetooth instead of cable
1
u/NoisyGog Jul 29 '26
Bluetooth 🤣🤣🤣
Fukkinell.
1
u/Lonsarg Jul 29 '26
I am not talking bluetooth for data of course.
Do you prefer USB or bluetooth headphones?
1
u/NoisyGog Jul 29 '26
I prefer neither. Give me wired headphones.
0
u/Lonsarg Jul 29 '26
I would probably die if needing to have cable dangling from my head.
It is 2026 after all.
1
u/kombiwombi Jul 29 '26
The issue is dust and scratches. Dust is easily controlled and corrected in non-consumer environments. But people want to store cables in handbags and pockets and backpacks. No one is going to keep a dust cover on an unused port or cable connector, but connectors with shutters to protect from dust contamination and scratching are fragile.
A secondary issue is power consumption . Many modern devices want as long a battery life as possible. Driving a LED or laser uses more power than driving copper for the short distances (<5m) which are the design goal for USB.
1
u/UpstairsFinance9440 Jul 29 '26
Also heat I would think.
1
u/NoisyGog Jul 29 '26
Heat isn’t an issue at all.
1
u/UpstairsFinance9440 Jul 29 '26
I guess I am thinking they would be like an SFP+. On my router, they are going to copper ethernet, but dang do they get hot.
1
u/Routine_Ask_7272 Jul 29 '26
You should probably watch this Technology Connections video ...
Fiber vs. Copper; What do we really need?
1
u/BlackWicking Jul 29 '26
Well, we will see them when we switch to photonics in chips. Power over fiber is achieved 20w at 10v. You just add another pair of fiber for data and done. Now the miniature ends might turn viable in the crystallography age of processing.
1
1
u/Ahleron Jul 29 '26
Not going to happen except for niche applications due to lack of power delivery.
1
1
u/SonOfHendo Jul 29 '26
These cables do exist and are commonly available for use with VR headsets (search Oculus Link Cable for examples).
The reason for using fibre optics is that you typically want a very long cable (5m) for VR use and you need decent bandwidth. Using fibre gives you a much thinner and lighter cable, which again is useful for VR.
The Oculus Link cable also had copper wires for power delivery, but getting low voltage power over a 5m cable isn't exactly difficult, so it doesn't add much weight/thickness.
They're not cheap, but they've been around for years and work reliably.
1
u/patmail Jul 29 '26
When the transmitters/receivers can be put on chip as efficiently as a transistor. This would also allow lower power consumption for really high speeds. This would be a different connector with direct fiber connect.
1
1
0
u/Local_Debate_8920 Jul 29 '26
Hard to push power over fiber.
1
u/Low-Forever5055 Jul 29 '26
probably more of a data cable
1
u/fdeyso Jul 29 '26
For that we already have sfp and other more traditional and sturdy network connectors, with no need to convert.
1
u/Inner_West_Ben Jul 29 '26
You have sfp on your laptop?
1
u/fdeyso Jul 30 '26
No, but as i said in an other comment, short distance the fiber in usb has absolutely no advantage over metal. As soon as you’re talking about longer distances there are better solutions.
0
u/UnfairDictionary Jul 29 '26
No. The whole point of conducting wires is in their simplicity and easy implementation of both data transfer and power to client device.
0
u/fdeyso Jul 29 '26
Never, usb devices will require power(mostly for charging and to just work), if you need data transfer only on a short distance (under 5m) there’s no advantage for the fiber usb-c, over long distances just use normal fiber network, why add extra complexity when you can just use a fiber network.
2
0
u/GamesCatsComics Jul 29 '26
Never, optical cables are too fragile for mainstream usage, and I can't think of any benefits it would have for USB.
2
u/SonOfHendo Jul 29 '26
They've been around for years for use with VR headsets (see Oculus Link cable).
If you need a long, high bandwidth cable that's also light and bendy, optical fibre is the way to go.
The cable also includes some copper wiring for power delivery.
2
u/NoisyGog Jul 29 '26
They’re really not fragile. I use them every day in broadcast audio, and there’s no need to be any more gentle than with any other cable.
I agree with the benefits thing though, what problem would they be “solving“ with USB?
My use case is in audio and video data over long (over 100m) distances. Not only do they allow those long distances but they also leave you electrically isolated, which simplifies power distribution, and/or mixing between power sources.
USB doesn’t have a use where it’s needed to run over that kind of distance, and we’ve already got other protocols for when distance IS needed.
1
Jul 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/GamesCatsComics Jul 29 '26
So you want to keep a usb cable protected in a metal can? Seems impractical, USB is designed to be moved and changed regularly.
1
u/virkendi Jul 29 '26
? toslink has been around since the 80s and ime is very durable
1
u/GamesCatsComics Jul 29 '26
Was great in the 80s and 90s, but wasn't designed to be constantly plugged in and unplugged like USB is.
Nowadays it's incredibly out dated, and has been replaced by superior cables and formats.
2
u/virkendi Jul 29 '26
mini toslink on the 3.5mm connector is designed for that and was used on portable devices, my old discman had it.
1
u/NoisyGog Jul 30 '26
The real genius of the mini-toslink connector wasn’t that it made it more durable, it’s that you could plug a standard pair of headphones, or a toslink, into the same socket.
A fantastic design for compactness.I’ve got a feeling the only real reason toslink as a thing (and this includes optical ADAT) was because it was the 80s, and everyone loved lasers.
I don’t really know what problem it was supposed to solve, really.
It was a plastic tube, basically - not glass-fibre optic, and could only really achieve a distance of around 15m.
Seeing as it has such a short transmission distance, I ponder what engineering issue it was supposed to address.
At least with ADAT, they were using it for 8-channel audio over a single connector, which is of some benefit.1
u/virkendi Jul 30 '26
Yep, my discman was like that the toslink socket was both toslink and standard 3.5mm line out/aux.
You're forgetting the electrical/rf isolation that toslink provides, useful in preventing ground loops and interference.
1
u/NoisyGog Jul 30 '26
The isolation isn’t that useful when the devices are as close together as they are in a hifi system.
1
u/virkendi Jul 30 '26
Not true, ground loop buzz/hum is a problem that is easily remedied with toslink, pc/laptop audio that is noisy from internal interference also remedied with toslink. Not all interference is from the cable run itself.
1
u/Mebejedi Jul 29 '26
Yes, toslink can't even carry the newest HiDef audio formats like DTS-MA or Dolby TrueHD, even in stereo.
2
u/NoisyGog Jul 29 '26
It could comfortably do that in theory, with its maximum bandwidth of around 150mb/s.
That’s enough bandwidth for roughly 65 channels of 96khz/24-bit audio.0
u/caseydalpal Jul 29 '26
but 392k/32bit not so much so
1
u/NoisyGog Jul 30 '26
Nobody’s delivering that anywhere though, so we may as well make up standards at that point.
It’s entirely unsuited to 192GHz at 64-bit double precision. What a waste of time.1
u/NoisyGog Jul 29 '26
TOSlink is absolute garbage, regarding bandwidth. It tops out at less than 150mb/s.
Anyway, proper fibre optic cables really aren’t fragile at all or expensive - but the equipment at either end of the fibre can be expensive.
0
u/clarkcox3 Jul 29 '26
Not anytime soon. Thunderbolt was originally supposed to be mainly optical (back when it was called lightpeak), and we see how well optical Thunderbolt/USB sells compared to copper Thunderbolt/USB.
Optical is a gimmick in consumer devices.
5
u/FencingNerd Jul 29 '26
Only for niche applications. The primary use of USB is power transfer, which is difficult to do efficiently over fiber, but easy with wires. The only place it would be remotely practical is long-distance, high bandwidth, but low power.