Live data from Hacker News

USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse

arstechnica.com

11–20 of 158 posts

Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse

#11

Who the heck came up with USB 3.2 Gen 2×2? That has got to be the dumbest idea. No one cares how it works, we just have to go through the utter crap of buying a cable. Does the low end manufactures pull the most weight in this org because that's the only way this makes any sense.

It makes more sense for high end manufacturers, who want to sell expensive high end cables and make it hard for people to find and buy cheap compatible cables from anyone else.

Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse

#13
post #11

Who the heck came up with USB 3.2 Gen 2×2? That has got to be the dumbest idea. No one cares how it works, we just have to go through the utter crap of buying a cable. Does the low end manufactures pull the most weight in this org because that's the only way this makes any sense.

It makes more sense for high end manufacturers, who want to sell expensive high end cables and make it hard for people to find and buy cheap compatible cables from anyone else.

Actually, I think its the other way. The confusing branding helps any low-end manufacture to do the least amount (cheapest) work to get something that looks like a high-end designation.

Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse

#14
post #5

USB-IF has to be doing this to deliberately confuse end users, right? I get that it's a specification number, not a product name, but they have to know that this will only cause problems for customers trying to find the appropriate cable. Incredibly, their language usage specifications doc https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/usb_3_2_language_pro... begins with this: > USB-IF emphasizes the importance and value of…

When quoting, please prefix lines with > instead of using preformatted text: preformatted text for blocks of prose is horribly unusable, everywhere.

Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse

#15

Who the heck came up with USB 3.2 Gen 2×2? That has got to be the dumbest idea. No one cares how it works, we just have to go through the utter crap of buying a cable. Does the low end manufactures pull the most weight in this org because that's the only way this makes any sense.

> Who the heck came up with USB 3.2 Gen 2×2? That has got to be the dumbest idea. No one cares how it works

Well, you will if you end up trying to use a part which supports 2×1 with a part which supports 1×2, since they both support the same top speed, but together they only support the lower speed of 1×1.

Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse

#17
I really loved USB-C then they screwed it up so badly. Can we have 1 cable that is required to have every exact feature available, no exceptions? Works on any device, supports everything from storage to video transfer (Monitors) and whatever else Apple would add to it.

Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse

#18
post #5

USB-IF has to be doing this to deliberately confuse end users, right? I get that it's a specification number, not a product name, but they have to know that this will only cause problems for customers trying to find the appropriate cable. Incredibly, their language usage specifications doc https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/usb_3_2_language_pro... begins with this: > USB-IF emphasizes the importance and value of…

Off topic, but this is how I see your quote btw: https://i.imgur.com/dIFTp4Y.png

Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse

#20

I really loved USB-C then they screwed it up so badly. Can we have 1 cable that is required to have every exact feature available, no exceptions? Works on any device, supports everything from storage to video transfer (Monitors) and whatever else Apple would add to it.

Look at Thunderbolt, where a cheap-ass cable still costs $20, for an idea of how that would turn out.
Post reply on HN