USB-C may be a good thing if it supplants Micro-USB (connector-wise), but in every other respect, it carries the same baggage as past standards, and will get even worse as the USB-IF piles more of them on top.
At least in the past, it was reasonably easy to determine the purpose and capability of a cable just by looking at it. With USB-C, good luck with that.
Does it support fast charging? Fast transfers? Both? Neither?
And by not making the baseline so that USB-C must support higher standards like 3.0 or better, it still forces one to carry around extra cables, or carefully select the proper types for intended use. They could have taken the cable guesswork out of the equation, and just left it to devices, by making the former meet a certain minimum standard.
Classic committee-think, with an eye toward being cheap, rather than good.
They’re not when I have to specifically buy a 3.0 cable to connect my computer to my drive enclosure for it to operate as intended.
The majority of them are 2.0 cables, which is fine for users who care more about fast charging their phones, but not as data cables.
The USB-IF could have made all USB-C cables meet 3.0 at a minimum, but it didn’t. What sense did it make to create a fancy new connector to usher in the new era of fast data, and then allow cables using the same connector to be gimped to 2.0 speeds? That’s not full forward progress.
And there’s the silliness of the whole 3.x Gen1/Gen2 naming scheme, which is a separate issue, created by geeks, for geeks. The average Joe who has.a hard time telling if their phone is fast charging stands no chance trying to sort out that mess.
There are 6 different types of USB-C to USB-C cables and they all look the same, it’s without doubt one of the worst cable standards I’ve ever encountered.
I have encountered at least one device (Canon EOS R camera) which will not charge from an incorrect type of “USB-C” cable.
In case it helps at all, the only light I’ve heard of which probably does work with a C-to-C cable is the Fenix PD36R. And I haven’t even been able to 100% confirm if it works. But based on the info I’ve found, it sounds like it probably does.
Otherwise, it seems to be the norm that lights require an A-to-C cable for charging.
I kind of feel like the whole “USB-C” thing on flashlights is a joke - the benefit of USB-C over all the other variants of USB is the ability for them to dynamically work out between the devices which device needs charging and which can be used to charge from, for example if I plug my phone into my laptop and the phone gets charged or if I plug my phone into my battery pack, the phone gets charged - but plugging the battery pack into the laptop, the laptop gets charged, all with the same cable.
That’s useful!
Being able to charge my flashlight from my battery pack or charge my phone from my flashlight, with the same cable, that’s also useful.
The way it’s implemented on flashlights is nothing more than a very mild convenience in it having the same connector - especially useless if the connector it needs (USB-A to USB-C) is one of the less common types available. It’d actually be much easier to find a USB-A to USB Mini or Micro cable.
I’m in the process replacing all my cables w/ C - C and C - Lightning, thus eliminating A ports all together. However I found a ton of made-in-China (no prejudices, most of mine just happen to be made in China) small electronics w/ C-inputs only support A - C.
If you ask the manufacture of most lights w/ C-ports they’ll tell you they only support A - C charging, especially smaller brands.