6 ms·

From lttlabs: > The inability for most docks to support the Switch 2 may not be malicious from Nintendo. It might just be a poor or lazy implementation of the

From lttlabs: > The inability for most docks to support the Switch 2 may not be malicious from Nintendo. It might just be a poor or lazy implementation of the USB-C specification From the verge [0], 2 months ago: > When I analyze the conversation between the Nintendo Switch 2 and its dock, I can see the two devices begin speaking in Nintendo’s own flavor of “vendor defined” language early in the conversation, before they sign off on any video output. And then, seemingly before the dock confirms that it’s engaged video-out, they send over 30 proprietary “unstructured” messages to one another. > […] > According to Antank, which says it checked with its chip supplier, that hexadecimal string “is indeed the current key being used by Nintendo.” My other sources are less sure. I'm pretty sure lttl's conclusion is plain wrong. It is not JUST lazy USB-C implementation, but a purposefully designed special proprietary protocol on top of USB-C [0] https://www.theverge.com/report/695915/switch-2-usb-c-third-party-docks-dont-work-authentication-encryption https://www.theverge.com/report/695915/switch-2-usb-c-third-...

notrealyme123 1y ago
At least on the video they made it quite clear that they assumed thant Nintendo did it on purpose, but they did not have enough proof to actually say it. So instead they sad "Nintendo stopped early with developing compatibility"
- whatevaa 1y ago
  They had to tip toe around this to avoid lawsuits. In practice, they made it quite clear they think this is on purpose.
  - ChrisGreenHeur 1y ago
    I'm not so sure nintendo would sue someone over wrong details on specifics of usb-c implementations.
    - machomaster 1y ago
      Nintendo is well-known for suing for all kinds of incredible reasons.
    - dev_l1x_be 1y ago
      Are you familiar that half the memes about Nintendo about suing people over ridicolous violations of their IP?
      - bdhcuidbebe 1y ago
        How is pointing out incompatible hardware related to IP?
        jerf 1y ago
        It isn't. The point is that it establishes that they are litigious. There's a tier above them (Oracle, for instance), but they're pretty up there in their willingness to head to court not just with other big corporations but with individuals.
    - kevincox 1y ago
      You can sue someone for anything, and Nintendo is infamous for doing so. They will put an army of lawyers on a case that has no merit (or just enough merit not to be thrown out early) to cost the defendant lots of money or just create sufficient risk that the defendant will settle to avoid the slim chance that they lose. Yes, our legal system has major flaws.
    - burnte 1y ago
      Nintendo literally uses people for playing their games in ways they don't like, regardless of if the user has actually broken any laws. They'll sue over people posting videos about games!
- nintendohater 1y ago
  It's called plausible deniability, i.e. Nintendo can claim they were just ignorant, and there's no proof of the contrary. That is, until EU rightfully fines them.
KeplerBoy 1y ago
Seems Nintendo has good reasons not to support it with 3rd party devices: Their own dock has active cooling, so with generic dongles the switch wouldn't be able to enter the docked performance mode (or have to throttle down pretty soon) and would have to output a blurry mess to 4k screens. Not a great user experience.
- argsnd 1y ago
  I recall reading that the dock’s cooling is for its own internals rather than those of the switch.
  - ErneX 1y ago
    It’s for the dock yes, but a dock passing its heat to the console is no bueno since the console pushes its hardware in docked mode.
- stoltzmann 1y ago
  I would say that not having any video output is a worse user experience than having blurry video output.
- crote 1y ago
  Sure, but what about 3rd party docks which do have adequate cooling? And how is it a good user experience to just silently refuse to work? If Nintendo genuinely cared about experience they'd just follow the standard and work with any dock, then pop up a notification if it notices that the device is overheating - perhaps even with a "We recommend the official dock" text. The current behaviour is completely unacceptable and needlessly user-hostile. There's no way around it: their USB-C implementation is broken.
  - KeplerBoy 1y ago
    I agree that their behavior is user-hostile, but doing it their way gets rid of all of the ambiguity involved with USB C. I kind of understand why they would rather break their USBC support intentionally and make it very clear that video out is only happening with their dock. Especially considering their audiences.
WmWsjA6B29B4nfk 1y ago
> Our monitoring of the interactions with the USB-C monitor shows that the negotiation does not even get to the point of the Vendor Defined Messages(VDM) where the dock would theoretically have to send the correct responses.
arghwhat 1y ago
There's a lot of misunderstandings about USB PD communication, in particular Vendor Defined Messages. The LTT video kept making this mistake, and mixing in misunderstandings around messages to the eMarker chip itself (SOP'). It was a painful watch. Vendor Defined Messages have is part of any normal PD exchange, as they're simply anything that isn't defined by the PD spec itself. You'll see VDMs when connecting any device supporting more than just dumb charging, as it's used for all sorts of things like DisplayPort, Thunderbolt, eMarker identification, etc. - stuff we'd expect ehre. The quote from Antak refers to just a single, possibly/likely proprietary, message. This could be to ID the dock on the basis of e.g. rejecting the switch 1 dock should one cram it in, or to reject switch 1 dongles. Maybe it's Nintendo speak for "dock capabilities: cooling", with the switch having no mode for docked gaming with reduced performance without cooling. Intentional incompatibility, yes, but it's 1 message of an unknown type within bog standard USB-PD, not a "vendor defined lanugage" or "over 30 proprietary messages".
- grishka 1y ago
  Why reject switch 1 accessories though? Sure the video resolution will have to be limited to 1080p, but that's kinda expected and I'm sure switch 2 can do that anyway
  - arghwhat 1y ago
    Switch currently runs in one of two modes: Docked and handheld. Games are written to expect those two modes, with rendering adjusted to those specifically and nothing else. Think of all the render settings in a PC game (in reality there are way more things the developer can adjust, but just for the sake of illustration), and assume there are instead two hardcoded presets which are selected based on whether or not the device is "docked". For Switch 1 games, docked means "we're running as fast as the internal cooling can handle and outputting 1080p, assume the user can't use the touch screen and such". A dongle is fine here as long as you don't block the air inlets or exhausts, or place the Switch on something heat sensitive. For Switch 2 games, docked means "we're running as fast as the externally boosted cooling can handle and cranking out 4k, and assume you can't use the touch screen and such". Assuming the fan does useful work here, then with a dongle you'll be thermal throttling and have a bad gaming experience - on a PC you'd turn down the settings, here those are hardcoded. So, what about using the switch 2 handheld mode on a switch 1 dock, seeing it's the same resolution? Well, if you tell it to run in handheld mode it might assume you have access to the touchscreen, always-on VRR and HDR, is using internal speakers, etc. It's totally doable, but to do this right the stack needs to be prepared for it. As such, I understand why they did it. Heck, this was the same issue for the Switch 1, and it took a while for third-party docks to pop up. It'll take all but a moment for third party docks to support this.
maccard 1y ago
The Nintendo switch was the poster child for “don’t standardise USB C, standardise the charging protocol”, and I used it as the poster child for why I disagree with USBC being a faux-standard And here we are again.
rcxdude 1y ago
Given the Verge seems to have mixed info from their sources and LTT is pulling their punches, it seems like it is at the very least not obvious that this is what they're doing. And at least one third-party seems to work with it, so it's plausible that it is not a cryptographically enforced incompatibility.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
burnte 1y ago
> > The inability for most docks to support the Switch 2 may not be malicious from Nintendo. It might just be a poor or lazy implementation of the USB-C specification > I'm pretty sure lttl's conclusion is plain wrong. They stated it MAY be lazy, it MAY be intentional. They declined to state a singular conclusion so I 'm not sure how they're wrong. I think maybe you feel they're saying it's not, but they're actually saying "we don't have conclusive proof either way, but we could see either being true given Nintendo's history of laziness at some times and maliciousness at other times."
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

notrealyme123 1y ago

At least on the video they made it quite clear that they assumed thant Nintendo did it on purpose, but they did not have enough proof to actually say it. So instead they sad "Nintendo stopped early with developing compatibility"

whatevaa 1y ago
They had to tip toe around this to avoid lawsuits. In practice, they made it quite clear they think this is on purpose.
- ChrisGreenHeur 1y ago
  I'm not so sure nintendo would sue someone over wrong details on specifics of usb-c implementations.
  - machomaster 1y ago
    Nintendo is well-known for suing for all kinds of incredible reasons.
  - dev_l1x_be 1y ago
    Are you familiar that half the memes about Nintendo about suing people over ridicolous violations of their IP?
    - bdhcuidbebe 1y ago
      How is pointing out incompatible hardware related to IP?
      - jerf 1y ago
        It isn't. The point is that it establishes that they are litigious. There's a tier above them (Oracle, for instance), but they're pretty up there in their willingness to head to court not just with other big corporations but with individuals.
  - kevincox 1y ago
    You can sue someone for anything, and Nintendo is infamous for doing so. They will put an army of lawyers on a case that has no merit (or just enough merit not to be thrown out early) to cost the defendant lots of money or just create sufficient risk that the defendant will settle to avoid the slim chance that they lose. Yes, our legal system has major flaws.
  - burnte 1y ago
    Nintendo literally uses people for playing their games in ways they don't like, regardless of if the user has actually broken any laws. They'll sue over people posting videos about games!
nintendohater 1y ago
It's called plausible deniability, i.e. Nintendo can claim they were just ignorant, and there's no proof of the contrary. That is, until EU rightfully fines them.

KeplerBoy 1y ago

Seems Nintendo has good reasons not to support it with 3rd party devices: Their own dock has active cooling, so with generic dongles the switch wouldn't be able to enter the docked performance mode (or have to throttle down pretty soon) and would have to output a blurry mess to 4k screens. Not a great user experience.

argsnd 1y ago
I recall reading that the dock’s cooling is for its own internals rather than those of the switch.
- ErneX 1y ago
  It’s for the dock yes, but a dock passing its heat to the console is no bueno since the console pushes its hardware in docked mode.
stoltzmann 1y ago
I would say that not having any video output is a worse user experience than having blurry video output.
crote 1y ago
Sure, but what about 3rd party docks which do have adequate cooling? And how is it a good user experience to just silently refuse to work? If Nintendo genuinely cared about experience they'd just follow the standard and work with any dock, then pop up a notification if it notices that the device is overheating - perhaps even with a "We recommend the official dock" text. The current behaviour is completely unacceptable and needlessly user-hostile. There's no way around it: their USB-C implementation is broken.
- KeplerBoy 1y ago
  I agree that their behavior is user-hostile, but doing it their way gets rid of all of the ambiguity involved with USB C. I kind of understand why they would rather break their USBC support intentionally and make it very clear that video out is only happening with their dock. Especially considering their audiences.

WmWsjA6B29B4nfk 1y ago

> Our monitoring of the interactions with the USB-C monitor shows that the negotiation does not even get to the point of the Vendor Defined Messages(VDM) where the dock would theoretically have to send the correct responses.

arghwhat 1y ago

There's a lot of misunderstandings about USB PD communication, in particular Vendor Defined Messages. The LTT video kept making this mistake, and mixing in misunderstandings around messages to the eMarker chip itself (SOP'). It was a painful watch. Vendor Defined Messages have is part of any normal PD exchange, as they're simply anything that isn't defined by the PD spec itself. You'll see VDMs when connecting any device supporting more than just dumb charging, as it's used for all sorts of things like DisplayPort, Thunderbolt, eMarker identification, etc. - stuff we'd expect ehre. The quote from Antak refers to just a single, possibly/likely proprietary, message. This could be to ID the dock on the basis of e.g. rejecting the switch 1 dock should one cram it in, or to reject switch 1 dongles. Maybe it's Nintendo speak for "dock capabilities: cooling", with the switch having no mode for docked gaming with reduced performance without cooling. Intentional incompatibility, yes, but it's 1 message of an unknown type within bog standard USB-PD, not a "vendor defined lanugage" or "over 30 proprietary messages".

grishka 1y ago
Why reject switch 1 accessories though? Sure the video resolution will have to be limited to 1080p, but that's kinda expected and I'm sure switch 2 can do that anyway
- arghwhat 1y ago
  Switch currently runs in one of two modes: Docked and handheld. Games are written to expect those two modes, with rendering adjusted to those specifically and nothing else. Think of all the render settings in a PC game (in reality there are way more things the developer can adjust, but just for the sake of illustration), and assume there are instead two hardcoded presets which are selected based on whether or not the device is "docked". For Switch 1 games, docked means "we're running as fast as the internal cooling can handle and outputting 1080p, assume the user can't use the touch screen and such". A dongle is fine here as long as you don't block the air inlets or exhausts, or place the Switch on something heat sensitive. For Switch 2 games, docked means "we're running as fast as the externally boosted cooling can handle and cranking out 4k, and assume you can't use the touch screen and such". Assuming the fan does useful work here, then with a dongle you'll be thermal throttling and have a bad gaming experience - on a PC you'd turn down the settings, here those are hardcoded. So, what about using the switch 2 handheld mode on a switch 1 dock, seeing it's the same resolution? Well, if you tell it to run in handheld mode it might assume you have access to the touchscreen, always-on VRR and HDR, is using internal speakers, etc. It's totally doable, but to do this right the stack needs to be prepared for it. As such, I understand why they did it. Heck, this was the same issue for the Switch 1, and it took a while for third-party docks to pop up. It'll take all but a moment for third party docks to support this.

maccard 1y ago

The Nintendo switch was the poster child for “don’t standardise USB C, standardise the charging protocol”, and I used it as the poster child for why I disagree with USBC being a faux-standard And here we are again.

rcxdude 1y ago

Given the Verge seems to have mixed info from their sources and LTT is pulling their punches, it seems like it is at the very least not obvious that this is what they're doing. And at least one third-party seems to work with it, so it's plausible that it is not a cryptographically enforced incompatibility.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

burnte 1y ago

> > The inability for most docks to support the Switch 2 may not be malicious from Nintendo. It might just be a poor or lazy implementation of the USB-C specification > I'm pretty sure lttl's conclusion is plain wrong. They stated it MAY be lazy, it MAY be intentional. They declined to state a singular conclusion so I 'm not sure how they're wrong. I think maybe you feel they're saying it's not, but they're actually saying "we don't have conclusive proof either way, but we could see either being true given Nintendo's history of laziness at some times and maliciousness at other times."

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]