Quoted post unavailable.
No post body was provided.
M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
91–100 of 333 posts
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
What sucks, however, is that you can transfer 1TB to a USB drive correctly, and then finally have a bit-error that spoils the entire transfer and might even corrupt your drive. Happened to me several times during testing on different machines and with different cables and drives (luckily no real data was lost, but USB is now sort of banned from my office for use with external harddrives). Any sane protocol would be a…
Are you sure it's a USB problem and not something else? Did you reduce all possible variables - ie how scientific were you in determining USB was the problem and not something else?
I think I tested quite thoroughly on very recent Linux versions with Rsync. Of course it is difficult to pinpoint the real culprit with certainty, but USB has no error correction, and that makes it the prime suspect here.
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#93Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's an accident. I think manufacturers pressured the body to ensure they can always claim compatibility with the latest standard. For that purpose, version number became irrelevant and the profile name ("Gen 2") became important.
Same thing happened with HDMI 2.1, all new features were defined as optional so everyone who only supports the 2.0 feature set can claim HDMI 2.1 compliance
It does make sense that all new features are optional. E.g. 8k resolution does not need to be supported by your TV/monitor or VRR does as well not need to be supported by a Bluray player.
As long as the devices can communicate and agree on signal, resolution etc. it's all fine.
If anything is a mess, it's the cables, where you have to be careful to read whether high resolutions or ethernet or what passes through that cable is supported.
If anything, it showed Verge (I think it was them who published that article) don't understand the purpose of the standard and intentionally tried to create controversy, where really isn't one.
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that I can't connect more than one monitor to my M1-based iMac is a fucking travesty.
May I ask why? I assume you were aware of this limitation, as Apple was pretty clear in the specs about it, that it only supports one external monitor. If you pull the trigger on a purchase without reading the specs, then it's pretty much on you, no?
It didn’t become widely known until after the M1s had shipped - I was caught unexpected after someone at work couldn’t connect two to theirs.
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#96Earlier 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…
Why do you think the marketers screwed this up and not technical people? Doesn't seem like the style of screw-up they usually make.
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that I can't connect more than one monitor to my M1-based iMac is a fucking travesty.
May I ask why? I assume you were aware of this limitation, as Apple was pretty clear in the specs about it, that it only supports one external monitor. If you pull the trigger on a purchase without reading the specs, then it's pretty much on you, no?
Presumably because similarly priced Intel Macs could connect to 2 or 3 displays with it's pathetically underpowered iGPU?
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#98Earlier 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…
Tricking people into buying new hardware while incurring zero marginal cost of development, sales, distribution? Sounds like a winner. /s
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. I think the USB naming is the result of not using marketers.
> I think the USB naming is the result of not using marketers.
No, it's specifically to give marketers what they want, which is the ability to advertise support for the latest version of the spec without actually having to improve the product.
It's not USB-IF's marketers that want this, it's the vendors who pay USB-IF whose marketers want this.
Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2
#100Apple seems to lack the connectivity options competing chips offer, as seen with the limit on external screens on some M1 models and these USB options. It's easy to underestimate the amount of work that external connectors need the chip to do in order to work optimally. It makes sense, of course, as the M1 evolved from a mobile chip with at most one port (USB C if you're lucky) and not a lot of host traffic. I hope A…
> as seen with the limit on external screens on some M1 models (…) I hope Apple fixes these issues soon It’s only the base M1 used in the low-end devices that has limited support for external screens. A MBPro with M1 Max can drive 3x6k (DP1.4) plus 1x4k(HDMI2.0). That seems like more than enough for a laptop. Sounds to me like these issues have already been fixed.
Apple doesn't make low-end devices.