Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's "3" for?
socket format?
you've got A, B, C, Micro, and Mini connectors all that conform to 3.0 and 3.1 spec...
Alas the standard needs standardised....
USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
41–50 of 158 posts
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#42At least WiFi figured out how to improve. Would love to see "USB 4" . No ".0" afterwards, just the simpler numeral. And if you need a bigger connector, then buy the "USB 4 XL connector" cable.
I had the pleasure of working with a girl who referred to 'ethernet cables' as 'server cables' as that was the functionality provided by ethernet, the wifi on her Macbook meant the internet was always on but lacked 'server access', hence the name of the 'ethernet cable' as a 'server cable'.
In this spirit I think that 'USB 4' really needs to be 'USB 4G'. Then you can have phones and the connectors use the same number. My former workmate would understand it. A '4G' cable for a '4G' mobile phone signal, that would be simple and the least techie people could understand it whilst people on HN faceplant in perpetuity.
USB '5G' would be along with '5G' phones. Everyone could be happy and cables could be fairly random, just try a selection until you get one that works, the clue being that cheaper ones for power adaptors don't let you connect your '5G port' on your computer to your screen or move data to your phone, much like mini USB now. Who reads labels anyway?
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#43Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#44USB-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…
The motivation is the same for re-branding 4G-LTE as 5G (or 6G). Sell the same thing with a new name so customers are tricked into thinking you're selling something newer and better based on the spec sheet without context.
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#45Ok, guess I'll go back to RS-485
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#46I 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.
Regular USB A/B had the same problem. I have been frustrated many times plugging in a micro B cable only to find that it carried power but not data
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#47I 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.
Apple sells one:
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MQ4H2AM/A/thunderbolt-3-u...
It does Thunderbolt 3, USB-C 3.1 Gen 2, and up to 100W of power delivery. It's a shame it's only available in one kinda-short length, but I think that's a technical limitation (any longer would require an active cable for Thunderbolt).
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#48Here is a helpful chart of USB versions and their connectors: https://preview.redd.it/s9dun6a1xmpz.png?width=960&crop=smar... e.g. USB 3.2 has the same connector as USB-C edit: I personally care far more about the connector than exact specs of each version
> USB 3.2 has the same connector as USB-C
USB-C is a connector, so you cannot say "has the same connector as USB-C".
It is the only connector for USB 3.2, and a connector that is compatible with USB 3.1 Gen 2.
Edit: I meant it is the only connector for USB 3.2 "Gen 2x2", and compatible with 3.1 Gen 2 (now called 3.2 Gen 2)
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#49I 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.
Regular USB A/B had the same problem. I have been frustrated many times plugging in a micro B cable only to find that it carried power but not data
I don't think there was ever a USB spec that allowed you to skip the data lines. That is purely a chinese cost optimization. Meanwhile, the confusion with USB 3 (C?) is designed in.
Re: USB 3.2 is going to make the current USB branding even worse
#50Here is a helpful chart of USB versions and their connectors: https://preview.redd.it/s9dun6a1xmpz.png?width=960&crop=smar... e.g. USB 3.2 has the same connector as USB-C edit: I personally care far more about the connector than exact specs of each version
This is unhelpful. The whole point of the article is that both of those middle columns are also USB 3.2, i.e. you have this:
* USB 3.2 Gen 1 5 Gbps (formerly USB 3.1 Gen 1) (formerly USB 3.0)
* USB 3.2 Gen 2 10 Gbps (formerly USB 3.1 Gen 2)
* USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 20 Gbps
Literally everyone that came up with this ridiculous naming scheme and literally everyone who approved it should never be allowed to participate in a working group ever again. This level of incompetency is just absurd. These people cannot be allowed to pollute critical standards with their terrible ideas.