Can it make DP1.4 and HDMI 2.1 obsolete?
USB4 Specification Announced: Adopting Thunderbolt 3 Protocol for 40 Gbps USB
231–240 of 279 posts
Re: USB4 Specification Announced: Adopting Thunderbolt 3 Protocol for 40 Gbps USB
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not a realistic expectation, unless you are OK with your "one cable" being 0.5m long. The "one-cable" thing is a dream, unfortunately.
"Active Thunderbolt 3 cables support Thunderbolt at 40Gbps data transfer at lengths of up to 2m. Optical cables are targeted later, with lengths of up to 60m." https://blog.startech.com/post/thunderbolt-3-the-basics/
Of course the optical cable won't transfer 100W of power, so we're back to needing two types of cable (power delivery USB-C and non-power-delivery USB-C).
I guess technically you could make a USB-C cable that transfers signals optically and has high-gauge wire for power, but that sounds unwieldly and expensive.
Re: USB4 Specification Announced: Adopting Thunderbolt 3 Protocol for 40 Gbps USB
#233What's optional? That's the most important thing to know is what's optional in the spec. That could make it great or a major pain. I'm referring to how many features the specification defines as "optional" for manufactures and that the USB organization requires for logos. This is why even USB-C is a nightmare. Consider a USB-C cable or device port. It could be charge only, data only, monitor support. There are even m…
Market opportunity: A USB-stick-shaped device that, when you plug it into a USB-C port, probes the port and lights up LEDs to show the port's capabilities.
[x] 5 Gbps
[x] 10 Gbps
[ ] 20 Gbps
[ ] Power Delivery
[x] DisplayPort Alternate Mode
Re: USB4 Specification Announced: Adopting Thunderbolt 3 Protocol for 40 Gbps USB
#234Whoa. Does the addition of Thunderbolt imply that all USB4 host systems are exposed to DMA attacks[0]? Doesn't this open up every USB system (all systems?) to arbitrary, uncontrolled memory access including silently flashing new firmware/microcode to system components? 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMA_attack
On my system (Dell XPS running Windows) I have to manually approve new Thunderbolt devices and cables. The driver prompts you to accept or ignore them. I assume this is implemented to prevent DMA attacks.
Re: USB4 Specification Announced: Adopting Thunderbolt 3 Protocol for 40 Gbps USB
#235Can it make DP1.4 and HDMI 2.1 obsolete?
You need one of those to send video, but they could be layered over Thunderbolt / USB4.
Re: USB4 Specification Announced: Adopting Thunderbolt 3 Protocol for 40 Gbps USB
#236I'd be curious about 40Gbps for what cable length. TB3 is great, you can in theory dock a laptop with a single cable that will do charging, 10gbe, USB hub, etc, but with a max 50cm cable, which makes it quite "un-lappable". I'd love to do the same with a 2m cable.
TB3 is only limited to 50cm for passive cables. Active cables can be longer.
Re: USB4 Specification Announced: Adopting Thunderbolt 3 Protocol for 40 Gbps USB
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
"should" The USB logo on usb1.0 cable should be printed on the "upper" side. How many times did you inserted it the wrong way?
The spec also mandates the orientation of the connector (socket) side but many manufactures have ignored that too.
Exactly. Without a qualification test, nobody would pay attention to those detail.
Re: USB4 Specification Announced: Adopting Thunderbolt 3 Protocol for 40 Gbps USB
#238What's optional? That's the most important thing to know is what's optional in the spec. That could make it great or a major pain. I'm referring to how many features the specification defines as "optional" for manufactures and that the USB organization requires for logos. This is why even USB-C is a nightmare. Consider a USB-C cable or device port. It could be charge only, data only, monitor support. There are even m…
The only way you can make a specification like USB "universal" is for parts of it to be optional. No one is going to build a USB mouse with a 40Gbit link speed, for example.
Right, but if it weren't for the USB forum's BS, that mouse would use a 12 Mbit/s link and be labelled "USB 1"
But no, thanks to their long-established BS you slap a USB C connector on that 12Mbit/s connection and congrats, you've got a USB 4 mouse.
Re: USB4 Specification Announced: Adopting Thunderbolt 3 Protocol for 40 Gbps USB
#239What's optional? That's the most important thing to know is what's optional in the spec. That could make it great or a major pain. I'm referring to how many features the specification defines as "optional" for manufactures and that the USB organization requires for logos. This is why even USB-C is a nightmare. Consider a USB-C cable or device port. It could be charge only, data only, monitor support. There are even m…
>This is why even USB-C is a nightmare. Consider a USB-C cable or device port. It could be charge only, data only, monitor support. There are even more permutations and sub-features. Oh, you wanted charging and found one that has it? Know how much power it enough or overkill? It could provide 15 watts, 100 watt, etc. Think you'll just google the specs page? Sure, they never miss providing any of these details or make any mistakes.
They should be pressured (by law) to include all these details in a simple form (akin to nutritional labels in foods), either on the cable itself or on a sticker attached to it.
Ideally there should also be a few profiles, so that you know if you want a cable for your monitor, you get e.g. a "USB4 / profile 1" (and the cable could mark the profile it belongs to on top).
Re: USB4 Specification Announced: Adopting Thunderbolt 3 Protocol for 40 Gbps USB
#240What's optional? That's the most important thing to know is what's optional in the spec. That could make it great or a major pain. I'm referring to how many features the specification defines as "optional" for manufactures and that the USB organization requires for logos. This is why even USB-C is a nightmare. Consider a USB-C cable or device port. It could be charge only, data only, monitor support. There are even m…
Everything is optional. USB-IF is for manufacturers, most of whom want to do whatever the cheapest quickest thing is. The user experience absolutely comes second to manufacturing cost and marking convenience. The naming confusion exists because cheap manufacturers don't want to be branded as the "lesser" product or be offering a "lesser" computer. The confusion aids them. They can ship a slightly cheaper computer or…
>The naming confusion exists because cheap manufacturers don't want to be branded as the "lesser" product or be offering a "lesser" computer. The confusion aids them.
Then force them to add appropriate clear markings (of the capabilities in a very simple format), or hit them with fines and deny them the ability to sell to the market without them.