sorry i should have said i use this, my car is 1 year old but they only stuck in a load of type-a connectors:
So on a normal day i only carry a type-c to type-c and my type-c power bank in my pocket but if i owned this lantern i would carry another cable as well with a fat end type-c to small end.
I dont think the people complaining are doing it to hurt anyone’s feelings or wind people up i just think they want a BLF light to be the absolute best which is what i would expect of a BLF project, i would also like to thank DBSAR for bringing this exciting light to fruition. I think if anyone has an older one without the fix then they could just attach a converter to the side with an elastic band, i wouldn’t lose any sleep over that.
This is where it goes wrong, BLF projects will never be the absolute best, we are amateurs, we are budget, and we work with B-class manufacturers, how can one expect that the outcome is the absolute best? BLF-teams are struggling to get our novel flashlights to be ok quality for a budget price, more is an illusion. And we got some very special flashlights done which is an achievement.
Who is planning to carry the LT1 with them daily (in a backpack maybe?), and use it enough to need daily charging? I thought this thing was good for something like 4ish hours/day for over a week with lots of useable light?
This might be the most convoluted attempt at trying to explain away a technical oversight, aka mistake, I’ve ever seen. The LT1 team shouldn’t have put a USB-C connector on the LT1 if the team didn’t intend follow the spec for USB-C. The LT1 team made a non-compliant USB-C device. No amount of hand waving or spin is going to change that. When using a USB-C port you have to follow the spec for USB-C. It requires the use of the CC pins in a UFP to indicate to the DFP how much current it can draw. This means putting pull-down resistors on them. They are required by the USB-C spec (which has to be followed when implementing a USB-C port), even if it’s just a 500mA device. Leaving the CC pins open is not allowed.
What are you, the USB-C Police? There’s plenty of devices out there that use the USB-C connector without complying with the USB-C standard, just like there are plenty of USB Micro devices in the same boat.
Can you do us all a favor and read the BLF LT thread? The original light was designed with USB Micro, people asked for a change to a USB-C port for durability reasons, not USB-C compliance reasons. Should it have been brought up that since they would be using a USB-C port that it should also be USB-C charge compliant? Sure, but that wasn’t what was requested during the design phase of this crowdsourced, foreign manufactured light. It would be a mistake if USB-C compliant charging was a design requirement however in this case it was not. Now, since the church of USB-C demands it, the capability will be built into a forthcoming light. This however is a NEW FEATURE.
Once again, if this USB-C issue is such a giant problem just don’t buy the light, wait for it to come with the features you require.
Stereodude, if you don’t like it don’t buy it or better yet go design your own usb-c compliant lantern if you want one so badly. Just stop complaining. Did you rant to the Raspberry Pi Foundation about how the rpi4 wasn’t 100% usb-c protocol compliant too?
Usb-a will never go away, usb-c is just another standard now alongside it like how the xkcd comic points out.
People made assumptions. People designing the light, people manufacturing the light, and people playing along at home all had different levels of knowledge of USB C and most did not understand how complicated it is. Everybody is learning more and that’s a good thing. Apple still hasn’t committed and the lantern doesn’t have a lightning port. And that is a good thing.
Sorry, but you’re wrong. Using the USB-C connector does NOT imply adherence to any of the protocol or charging standards on the backend. That’s even the official stance of the USB standards organization. The connector is just that, a way of connecting a cable to a device, nothing more.
I followed the Lantern thread from the first post. They delivered more than was promised originally with ONE exception: The out the door cost was desired (note I didn’t say promised) to be $40. That target was missed. I’m happy with the lantern and want to thank all of you folks that did the heavy lifting (and Sofirn as well). The budget part of the project was how much money you non-paid volunteers made on your hard work:-) (I’m joking… joking!!!)
Thank you all so much! Love the lantern, and the BLF wrapped batteries AmishBill did too are a fantastic addition. Great stuff!
Yes.
