Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

USB-IF Confusingly Merges USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 Under New USB 3.2 Branding

Sorry USB-IF - I will continue to use the original naming and numbering - Don't confuse things with your mucking about!

Post your anger here https://www.usb.org/contact

If they get flooded by messages they will be forced to undo this mess.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SamuelFleming
Clearly list all the capabilities of your device port(s) or cable.

Then the customer can decide if it meets their requirements.
 
Instead of addressing compatibility concern, such as vague power delivery capability, lack of decent USB-C hubs, USB-IF pulls craps like this.
 
Apple: 2 cable standards for mobile devices with 2 unique names in 15 years.
USB-IF: 8 cable standards for mobile devices with 14 confusingly-similar names in 15 years.

Why does anyone one this to be the standard for all devices?
 
  • Like
Reactions: t1meless1nf1n1t
Much ado about nothing.

Once it ripples through marketingspace, the SuperSpeed branding will shield novice consumers from the 3.x renaming tomfoolery. (That’s the whole point, Juli.) They care only that the gizmo plugs in and works. Thanks to protocol auto-negotiation, that’s most of the time.
 
JoeCassara said:
Much ado about nothing.

Once it ripples through marketingspace, the SuperSpeed branding will shield novice consumers from the 3.x renaming tomfoolery. (That’s the whole point, Juli.) They care only that the gizmo plugs in and works. Thanks to protocol auto-negotiation, that’s most of the time.
Click to expand...

You just gotta’ love something that works “most of the time”

Lol
 
No wonder this standard is a mess. I’m scared to really jump in considering all the craziness going on. Plus don’t get me started on cables that only charge va those that transfer data. I thought usb-c was supposed to make all of this simple.
 
cparktd said:
No, Super Duper speed comes next.
Click to expand...

I have inside knowledge it’s USB 3000 called WarpSpeed USB for short, to be renamed USB 3000.2001.2010 as a new one with Type-X were USB-X 1Gen is just USB 3000 with the new Type-X connector and new type under development called Type-Fk

This is just becoming one big fk mess
 
ir_fuel said:
So funny they call it "SuperSpeed".
It will probably be considered very slow 10 years from now. What will they come up with then? "HyperSpeed"?
Click to expand...

Indeed.

USB 1.x started off with Low Speed and Full Speed. Then they realized they would offer much more speed than that in USB 2.0, so they called that High Speed (that's right: by USB logic, High Speed is more than Full Speed). Then that wasn't really so high any more by the time USB 3.0 came about, so now that's SuperSpeed.

I also don't get why there needs to be a "Technical Term" and a "Marketing Term". The "technical" term isn't even that technical at all (it doesn't even name a bandwidth).

The problem they're trying to solve is that vendors want to keep selling 5 or 10 Gb/s devices even though 20 Gb/s is a thing, but consumers don't want to get the impression that they're getting something "outdated", so they don't want to keep calling those 3.0 and 3.1.

In reality, this problem doesn't exist. Consumers are already confused to no end by the relationship between USB-C and USB 3.0, by some cables offering Thunderbolt and others offering Power Delivery and yet others offering both, by different modes like DisplayPort and additions like On-The-Go. Whether they're on the "newest" version really isn't what they're worried about.

Just go with something simple like SS5, SS10, SS20 for respective bandwidths. USB 3.3 add another bandwidth? Great, name it SS40. Done and done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DCIFRTHS, Colonel Blimp and PickUrPoison
Idec50 said:
So, the standardization team continues to work towards destroying standardization. At what point will they be complicit in proporietary cables for all manufacturers. Can’t wait for my Apple USB-C that only works on Apple devices.
Click to expand...

USB-C cables are already a mess! Some cables are only for power others only data! No clear ID's on them either.
 
Shin-Ra said:
Clearly list all the capabilities of your device port(s) or cable.

Then the customer can decide if it meets their requirements.
Click to expand...

That only works on the Planet of the Engineers. This is planet Earth, full of normal humans, that are usually not like you or me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back