It highly depends what protocol that chip is using. In case of Apple it is either a USB controller (MacBook) or a Thunderbolt controller (MacBook Pro, iMac). The chips in the connector which you seem to be referring to are part of the connector and thus part of the standard. Whatever is using the connector needs to implement it (the aforementioned USB or Thunderbolt controller).
The set of specifications is the definition of what a standard is. In this case the standard is about a connector and a cable.
Ah so you don't have an answer to the question why this is a problem since the right charger and cable come with the notebook. Think up of actual real world issues instead of making up all these silly things and counter things technically instead of personally.
They are selling either USB-C or Thunderbolt 3 cables. If you want them to be calling it passive and active then by all means, contact them. I don't care how they call it as long as it is clear what it is (and it is very clear).
Why test when it is already been tested by many reviewers (MacRumors being one), it is in the standard and listed in whitepapers from Intel as well? The 0.5m cable works for both USB and Thunderbolt, the other lengths do not because for those lengths you need the smarter cable (thus the active one).
I have the 0.5m and 2m cable and the difference in cable thickness is nothing but the difference in size of the connector is considerable. The active cable has a much bigger one which is easily explained due to the added circuitry. Something that is also noticeable when you touch it after it has been in use for some time. The active one is hotter.
I'm not ignoring anything. The problem here is that you are only seeing the minute details and not the bigger picture. Back to my original comment: there are always a lot of different kinds of cables in the beginning of any standard. Even quality varies a lot. After some time (which is where we are moving to within the next year) this fades away and there will be less different cables. The reason for that is quite simple: adoption rate. People are not going to need all those speciality cables or the ones with feature xy but not z. In the end they either want something that does it all (and is expensive) or something cheap.
The other thing you are missing here just like with the power cable is the fact that when you buy a device they always come with one (or even multiple ones). There is no choosing a cable because you use what came with the device.
Exactly, yours. Someone else will have different criteria. When a drive crashes the only thing people care about is getting their data off the drive. They don't care how long it takes at all, they just want the data. When you are working with things on a daily basis then it might annoy you but then you'd actually have to notice the difference. Most people won't due to lack of knowledge (read: they simply don't know any better) and some even get used to it (they even get used to a malware infested Windows machine).
I noticed since this reply of yours is once again filled with things that are only partially correct and personal attacks because you fail to counter it with actual technical knowledge. Try doing the latter instead of the former.
Then you didn't understand what VESA wrote. USB-C doesn't support a specific protocol. The DisplayPort standard specifies a certain bandwidth for a lane and 4k@60Hz needs a certain bandwidth. Right now it means that 4k@60Hz has to use all 4 lanes to get that bandwidth. With newer versions of DisplayPort the bandwidth of a lane can be (and will be) increased thus requiring less lanes. PCIe and Thunderbolt same thing.
Whether or not things are rosy highly depends on what display and resolution you are using. Many people are below 2k displays and are already rosy because DP1.2 easily supports those. The people with 4k displays are fine too. The ones with 5k and wanting 8k are not ok.
You were under the impression that having an ID chip meant that it is "active" whereas active, passive and ID chip are all separate things that do not have anything to do with each other. I had to point that out to you by mentioned several protocols that all have this ID chip too but are all passive. The USB-C documentation has a really good chapter on this which explains it very clearly. It even tells you there are 2 kinds of ID chips being used in USB-C.
What active has always meant is that there has to be a "regulator" chip (a chip that regulates/controls the data signals). Passive simply means that there is no such chip. Neither of them say anything about an ID chip. USB-C and Thunderbolt follow that principle as detailed by the standards themselves.
Yeah, just in the early days. It's going to change since everything will be moving to USB-C anyway and people either going for something that is cheap or something that works properly (which will be more expensive). It's something you see with docking stations too. People aren't buying the much cheaper USB ones, they were buying the expensive proprietary/Thunderbolt ones.
Less and less. Lots of things are already wireless and the amount of USB-C cables one really needs decreases too. I believe there will be only 2 kinds left: the normal priced one that does everything and the cheap one which comes with limitations. Which is exactly the idea behind these cables anyway.
That isn't sarcasm, that's narcism since you are clearly not the only person in the world. When we look at countries like China or a content such as Africa alone there will be more people without those extremely expensive 4k displays. Even in a rich country like The Netherlands or Germany we are seeing this. For most people 200 euro is already considered expensive, let alone 500.
You really seem to be living in your own world. I'll just leave you to it then.