Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least Wi-Fi folks seem to have taken a hint with Wi-Fi 6.
Didn't last long, haha, the new one is 6E.
How did they fuck this up already /o\
M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
61–70 of 333 posts
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what in the world could "USB 3.1 Gen 2" possibly mean? Versions are free, why not simply name it "USB 3.2" and make the next one 3.3? USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the straight rebranding of USB 3.0, USB 3.1 Gen 2 is the "original" 3.1, which is 3.0 updated to a 10Gbps signalling rate (from 5), and a more efficient encoding (128/132, versus 8/10). But wait, there's worse! USB 3.2 Gen 1 is the same thing as USB 3.1 Gen 1 USB 3.2…
> USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the straight rebranding of USB 3.0 Why? To solve what exactly? In a sane world, it'd be major.minor, with nothing appended at the end. Allowing marketers to take over everything was such a terrible mistake. At this point I myself just don't differentiate USB versions beyond 3.0. 2.0 is the slow one, 3.0 is the fast one, anything newer is "so fast I won't ever saturate this much bandwidth anyway". T…
Part of the reason I assume is they have both newer and more expensive editions. A port could be using the latest spec and features but not implanting the full feature set of the more expensive ports.
Products like intel cpus have tiers like i5 and generations. This is kind of like what USB did but so much worse.
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what in the world could "USB 3.1 Gen 2" possibly mean? Versions are free, why not simply name it "USB 3.2" and make the next one 3.3? USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the straight rebranding of USB 3.0, USB 3.1 Gen 2 is the "original" 3.1, which is 3.0 updated to a 10Gbps signalling rate (from 5), and a more efficient encoding (128/132, versus 8/10). But wait, there's worse! USB 3.2 Gen 1 is the same thing as USB 3.1 Gen 1 USB 3.2…
> USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the straight rebranding of USB 3.0 Why? To solve what exactly? In a sane world, it'd be major.minor, with nothing appended at the end. Allowing marketers to take over everything was such a terrible mistake. At this point I myself just don't differentiate USB versions beyond 3.0. 2.0 is the slow one, 3.0 is the fast one, anything newer is "so fast I won't ever saturate this much bandwidth anyway". T…
> Allowing marketers to take over everything was such a terrible mistake.
How else it could possibly play out? It's nice to think that NIST or a similar U.S. government agency could standardize everything, but outside of industries that are most government funded (defense, etc.) or deeply connected to government funding (medical research) the forces of marketing are going to take over eventually and at scale. It's not like the government can or will force consumer electronics marketing to be honest, at least in the U.S. and Europe.
I was a little disappointed, for example, to learn during the HDMI 2.1a fiasco that HDMI (the organization/legal entity responsible for the standards), VESA, etc. are loosely organized groups from the companies in the industries. So if they want to rename HDMI 2.0 to 2.1a to make their old products look better, nothing's really stopping them.
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what in the world could "USB 3.1 Gen 2" possibly mean? Versions are free, why not simply name it "USB 3.2" and make the next one 3.3? USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the straight rebranding of USB 3.0, USB 3.1 Gen 2 is the "original" 3.1, which is 3.0 updated to a 10Gbps signalling rate (from 5), and a more efficient encoding (128/132, versus 8/10). But wait, there's worse! USB 3.2 Gen 1 is the same thing as USB 3.1 Gen 1 USB 3.2…
> USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the straight rebranding of USB 3.0 Why? To solve what exactly? In a sane world, it'd be major.minor, with nothing appended at the end. Allowing marketers to take over everything was such a terrible mistake. At this point I myself just don't differentiate USB versions beyond 3.0. 2.0 is the slow one, 3.0 is the fast one, anything newer is "so fast I won't ever saturate this much bandwidth anyway". T…
I told my wife 2.0 is where you stick mouse and 3.0 pendrive
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#65The inability of the USB standards body to stick to a versioning scheme beggars belief: what in the world could "USB 3.1 Gen 2" possibly mean? Versions are free, why not simply name it "USB 3.2" and make the next one 3.3? "Gen 2" strikes me as the "Essay FINAL (final version 2).docx" of standards revisions.
> what in the world could "USB 3.1 Gen 2" possibly mean? Versions are free, why not simply name it "USB 3.2" and make the next one 3.3? USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the straight rebranding of USB 3.0, USB 3.1 Gen 2 is the "original" 3.1, which is 3.0 updated to a 10Gbps signalling rate (from 5), and a more efficient encoding (128/132, versus 8/10). But wait, there's worse! USB 3.2 Gen 1 is the same thing as USB 3.1 Gen 1 USB 3.2…
I hope USB4 fixes things.
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Assuming a byte being 10 bits instead of 8 bits would actually make the drive capacity lower in terms of bytes (of course not physically but for marketing), which a vendor probably doesn't want.
I am not sure what the op is talking about with bytes, but it could be powers of 2 v. powers of ten for kb/mb/gb.
Yeah, that's the kibibytes vs kilobytes / gibibytes vs gigabytes diffence...
Which adds up to ~7% difference in capacity when talking about GiB/GB, and even 12.5% when talking about PiB/PB
Kibibyte (KiB)
1,024¹ = 1,024
Mebibyte (MiB)
1,024² = 1,048,576
Gibibyte (GiB)
1,024³ = 1,073,741,824
Tebibyte (TiB)
1,024⁴ = 1,099,511,627,776
Pebibyte (PiB)
1,024⁵ = 1,125,899,906,842,62
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that was the case, the front non-thunderbolt ports would not be faster, but they are.
If the cable is wrecking signal integrity, the port could absolutely change things if the ports have slightly different hardware that's generating the signal. RF does weird things. Just as a very simplistic analog DC example, if you have wires that are both sitting at 3V but one can only drive 100 mA while the other can drive 1A. If you only draw 50 mA they'd look near identical but as soon as soon as you tried to ge…
As a less technical anecdote, I bought one of those usb "sound cards" and it had noise when plugged into the front usb ports but worked fine into the back ones on the same PC.
The sound was transmitted digitally and didn't need that much bandwidth, so the only explanation is "dirty" power on the power wires, I think?
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#68USB went from being the universal bus, to just being the universal connector. There are never any guarantees that your device (or cable!) actually supports the operation you’re trying
> (or cable!) Recently, I tried to find a Displayport-compatible cable and went through three (admittedly on the cheap side) cables that claimed to support it but didn't - in the end, I just bought a certified Thunderbolt 3 cable to avoid any ambiguity in whether they included all the wires or not
Yep. I use two monitors, both on displayport. Bought like 4 cables and one adapter to get a working combination :)
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what in the world could "USB 3.1 Gen 2" possibly mean? Versions are free, why not simply name it "USB 3.2" and make the next one 3.3? USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the straight rebranding of USB 3.0, USB 3.1 Gen 2 is the "original" 3.1, which is 3.0 updated to a 10Gbps signalling rate (from 5), and a more efficient encoding (128/132, versus 8/10). But wait, there's worse! USB 3.2 Gen 1 is the same thing as USB 3.1 Gen 1 USB 3.2…
I hope USB4 fixes things.
No post body was provided.
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what in the world could "USB 3.1 Gen 2" possibly mean? Versions are free, why not simply name it "USB 3.2" and make the next one 3.3? USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the straight rebranding of USB 3.0, USB 3.1 Gen 2 is the "original" 3.1, which is 3.0 updated to a 10Gbps signalling rate (from 5), and a more efficient encoding (128/132, versus 8/10). But wait, there's worse! USB 3.2 Gen 1 is the same thing as USB 3.1 Gen 1 USB 3.2…
I hope USB4 fixes things.
Until USB4 2.1 gen3 comes along.