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.
USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
11–20 of 158 posts
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#12Don't know if it's my dyslexic brain, but did anyone else have a hard time reading that article due to trying to keep sense of the different standards names?
Yes.
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#13Who 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
#14USB-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…
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#15Who 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.
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
#16But they need a new reason to sell you more cables, dongles, and adapters.
Maybe they can call the next one USB 5G! That not only helps confuse the branding even more, but . . . It worked for AT&T.
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#17Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#18USB-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…
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#19Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#20I 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.