A Look Inside Apple's $130 USB-C Cable

Bit of a stretch to call that a "charging cable." Their 240W rated 2 meter USB-C charging cable is $30 [LINK] But if you're interested in why the Thunderbolt cable costs more than charging cables, some folks put one through a CT scanner recently: [VIDEO]

You might want to see Adam Savage’s video about why, say, Apple’s $130 3’ Thunderbolt cable (the pinnacle of cables) actually is not overpriced. It also gives a sense as to what a quality cable is like. [VIDEO]

As a knotable person myself, this is AMAZING. Some thoughts on application of this knowledge would be to look at the patterns as you have described as cross-sections of rope weaving with the circular looming as the individual bobbins/spinny-things in an industrial loom - so rather that just woven-sheeth and full spin style cabling, one might achieve some really incredible properties in the woven elements along a axis such as these represent. Especially if you further differentiate btwn material and woven state (Are you weaving in an already spun set of filiments? What are the materials for the various inputs, and even further - imagine you have a set of elements in the loom where youre certain threads are the static, more rigid scaffold - like woven titanium strands which then feed into another loom which is weaving in the kevlar or other materials including a core of optics which is protected by the outer woven sheath from these patterns of 2D knots stretched out along an axis - certain elements can be printed such like the articulating spine of a snake. It could make a machinable-high-tensile strength cable with an optical core with protected turn radii (titanium snake spine) See here for reference to advanced cabling: [VIDEO]

For those interested, this video shows scans of what is inside Apple’s cable vs cheap cables off Amazon. [VIDEO] For those who prefer to read and want to look at the scans in more detail, that can be found here: [LINK]

[VIDEO] Maybe you could consider Apple cables to be overengineered , but I can readily understand why a cable built this way - irrespective of manufacturer - is not overpriced . And it's not just about a chip. The cable is simply factually better on every metric than the hand-soldered 4 wire el cheapo one at 15~16 min. There is no cult in that. Now if one only needs to carry USB 2.0 speeds or a limited amount of power it'd be ridiculous to buy a 100+ or even 50+ cable. That doesn't make the cable overpriced either, merely overspecced for that use case.

Adam Savage (Myth Buster) did a video on why Apple Thunderbolt-4 is so expensive ($130), by looking at the detail in construction vs cheap alternatives. [VIDEO]

That tickled a memory of a video... and I hunted it up. Adam Savage's Tested : Look Inside Apple's $130 USB-C Cable - [VIDEO] (1 minute in "we've been saying that our phones have more computing power than the Apollo guidance computer but I'm positive now that this cable has more computing power than the Apollo guidance computer") That video is a look at cables (not just Apple's) with Lumafield's CT Scan.

Lumifield quite recently showed on Adam Savage's Tested again, with some literal insights on a reasonably-diverse array of different 18650 cells: [VIDEO] It's a good watch, and I learned some new stuff about some things that I only knew a little bit about before.