Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Taking a bite out of bad standards

Taking a bite out of bad standards

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
designvisual-studiocomgraphicsiot
12 Posts 5 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • H honey the codewitch

    So there's a little thing called a "Grove port" which is simply a 4 wire connector of a particular form factor. Nothing complicated, just Grove implies a particular size and subset of functionality vs a general purpose connector, but is physically otherwise no different. Simple as could be. So how can they screw this up? I ordered some "Grove" connectors either from makerfabs or m5 - I can't remember which company. Well it was murder trying to fit the connector into the Grove port. Finally I realized that the release clip was too large. Lacking a pair of pliers near at hand, I bit the damned release clip off. Fits like a charm now. Seriously, how hard is it to screw up something so basic?

    Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

    J Offline
    J Offline
    jschell
    wrote on last edited by
    #2

    I could not find a specification either for the actual wiring and definitely not for the connector.

    H 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • J jschell

      I could not find a specification either for the actual wiring and definitely not for the connector.

      H Offline
      H Offline
      honey the codewitch
      wrote on last edited by
      #3

      Grove connectors - Engineering LibreTexts[^]

      Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

      J 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • H honey the codewitch

        So there's a little thing called a "Grove port" which is simply a 4 wire connector of a particular form factor. Nothing complicated, just Grove implies a particular size and subset of functionality vs a general purpose connector, but is physically otherwise no different. Simple as could be. So how can they screw this up? I ordered some "Grove" connectors either from makerfabs or m5 - I can't remember which company. Well it was murder trying to fit the connector into the Grove port. Finally I realized that the release clip was too large. Lacking a pair of pliers near at hand, I bit the damned release clip off. Fits like a charm now. Seriously, how hard is it to screw up something so basic?

        Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

        StarNamer workS Offline
        StarNamer workS Offline
        StarNamer work
        wrote on last edited by
        #4

        Except the GROVE connector isn't a public standard. It's proprietary to Seed. So unless it's made or licensed by them it *has* to be subtly different even if it mostly fits. https://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/9030/what-type-of-connector-does-the-grove-system-use[^]

        H 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • StarNamer workS StarNamer work

          Except the GROVE connector isn't a public standard. It's proprietary to Seed. So unless it's made or licensed by them it *has* to be subtly different even if it mostly fits. https://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/9030/what-type-of-connector-does-the-grove-system-use[^]

          H Offline
          H Offline
          honey the codewitch
          wrote on last edited by
          #5

          It's not proprietary, but I should have said defacto standard. Many kits from different vendors also have these ports.

          Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • H honey the codewitch

            So there's a little thing called a "Grove port" which is simply a 4 wire connector of a particular form factor. Nothing complicated, just Grove implies a particular size and subset of functionality vs a general purpose connector, but is physically otherwise no different. Simple as could be. So how can they screw this up? I ordered some "Grove" connectors either from makerfabs or m5 - I can't remember which company. Well it was murder trying to fit the connector into the Grove port. Finally I realized that the release clip was too large. Lacking a pair of pliers near at hand, I bit the damned release clip off. Fits like a charm now. Seriously, how hard is it to screw up something so basic?

            Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

            J Offline
            J Offline
            jana_hus
            wrote on last edited by
            #6

            I got interested in learning / working with automotive "standard" OBD. So I ordered an OBD connector... My OF and diabetes hands had a hard time joining the connector with OBD Mini Bluetooth adapter. OBD Mini Bluetooth adapter works fine plugging into the car OBD outlet ... The usual "excuse" - "they.." use metric...

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • H honey the codewitch

              So there's a little thing called a "Grove port" which is simply a 4 wire connector of a particular form factor. Nothing complicated, just Grove implies a particular size and subset of functionality vs a general purpose connector, but is physically otherwise no different. Simple as could be. So how can they screw this up? I ordered some "Grove" connectors either from makerfabs or m5 - I can't remember which company. Well it was murder trying to fit the connector into the Grove port. Finally I realized that the release clip was too large. Lacking a pair of pliers near at hand, I bit the damned release clip off. Fits like a charm now. Seriously, how hard is it to screw up something so basic?

              Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

              pkfoxP Offline
              pkfoxP Offline
              pkfox
              wrote on last edited by
              #7

              Easier than fixing your teeth I'd imagine :-D

              In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S Thompson - RIP

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • H honey the codewitch

                Grove connectors - Engineering LibreTexts[^]

                Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                J Offline
                J Offline
                jschell
                wrote on last edited by
                #8

                That is not close to a specification. In contrast I looked for "usb-c specification" and found one right away.

                H 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • J jschell

                  That is not close to a specification. In contrast I looked for "usb-c specification" and found one right away.

                  H Offline
                  H Offline
                  honey the codewitch
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #9

                  You asked for the wiring. That has the wiring. As far as the size of the plug, that information is also available. Even if you take exception to the way it is presented, your exception does not matter. The information is there.

                  Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                  J 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • H honey the codewitch

                    You asked for the wiring. That has the wiring. As far as the size of the plug, that information is also available. Even if you take exception to the way it is presented, your exception does not matter. The information is there.

                    Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                    J Offline
                    J Offline
                    jschell
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #10

                    honey the codewitch wrote:

                    You asked for the wiring. That has the wiring.

                    No I asked for a "specification". I used that word as I expect it to be used. For example RFC 9113 is one of the vast number of RFCs that specify how HTTP works. And if I google for "usb-c specification" I find something that looks like a specification also. Perhaps not as independent as one would prefer but at least quite a few people agree to it. And to get even more general as an example there is the "American wire gauge" which has a specification as well. It specifies the size of wire. B258 Standard Specification for Standard Nominal Diameters and Cross-Sectional Areas of AWG Sizes of Solid Round Wires Used as Electrical Conductors[^] What you provided looks like something that a hobbyist wrote up. And definitely not something that came from a standards body. Noting of course that you use the word "standards". Now might be the case that there is in fact no actual standard. If so then the fact that you were able to buy parts that mismatch is no surprising. But if there is an actual standard then where is it?

                    H 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • J jschell

                      honey the codewitch wrote:

                      You asked for the wiring. That has the wiring.

                      No I asked for a "specification". I used that word as I expect it to be used. For example RFC 9113 is one of the vast number of RFCs that specify how HTTP works. And if I google for "usb-c specification" I find something that looks like a specification also. Perhaps not as independent as one would prefer but at least quite a few people agree to it. And to get even more general as an example there is the "American wire gauge" which has a specification as well. It specifies the size of wire. B258 Standard Specification for Standard Nominal Diameters and Cross-Sectional Areas of AWG Sizes of Solid Round Wires Used as Electrical Conductors[^] What you provided looks like something that a hobbyist wrote up. And definitely not something that came from a standards body. Noting of course that you use the word "standards". Now might be the case that there is in fact no actual standard. If so then the fact that you were able to buy parts that mismatch is no surprising. But if there is an actual standard then where is it?

                      H Offline
                      H Offline
                      honey the codewitch
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #11

                      It's a "de facto standard" De facto standard - Wikipedia[^]

                      Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                      J 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • H honey the codewitch

                        It's a "de facto standard" De facto standard - Wikipedia[^]

                        Check out my IoT graphics library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx And my IoT UI/User Experience library here: https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix

                        J Offline
                        J Offline
                        jschell
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #12

                        And thus mismatches are to be expected.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Don't have an account? Register

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • World
                        • Users
                        • Groups