I'm always flabbergasted at how difficult and hostile to the user is discern between the various USB standards.
USB Cheat Sheet
41–50 of 174 posts
Re: USB Cheat Sheet
#42Some of the entries seem incorrect: "USB 3.2 (USB 3.2 Gen 2x2) and "USB 4" (USB 4 USB4 Gen 2×2) should have the same nominal data rate of 2500MB/s, they're 2 lanes (x2) of 10GB/s. Though they are apparently coded differently electrically, so they're distinct protocols. The tables would benefit from mentioning the coding (8/10 or 128/132) as IMO it's one of the most confusing bits when you see the effective data rates…
He goes off the rails earlier than that, by saying that USB 2.0 is "also known as" Hi-speed. HS is only one data rate supported by the USB 2.0 standard; it incorporates both full speed from the earlier standard and low speed, which isn't mentioned at all.
That's more of an approximation matching how, frankly, most people think of the specs: yes USB 2.0 supersedes 1.1 entirely, but everyone will think of "full speed" and "low speed" as USB 1 which are BC supported by USB 2.0.
That's also why USB 3.1 and 3.2's rebranding of previous versions is so confusing and a pain in the ass to keep straight: USB 3.2 1x1 is USB 3.1 Gen 1 is USB 3.0 (ignoring the USB 2.0 BC).
Re: USB Cheat Sheet
#43I have a related question: Is the official name USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 or USB 3.2 Gen 2×2 (x vs ×)?
The USB pages and specs (on usb.org) seem to use "x" where they use the technical spelling.
Re: USB Cheat Sheet
#44Ah USB. In the old days it was different cables for different things, nowadays it's 1 connector for everything but beware, the cable might physically plug into the socket, but whether you'll get the functionality you want?
Seems it is going backward to me too.
At one point I remember hooking up a computer being like one of those shape puzzles we give children. If you can match them they'll work. No two of my devices used the same cable or port, but if it fit it'd work.
Keyboard switched to PS/2 so those and PS/2 mice were confusing, but eventually they standardized on colours.
USB came out and you could just plug it in wherever. This was great.
And now? 20 combinations of cable features with the same socket but all do something else. I can only imagine what the return rate will be for stuff like this.
Re: USB Cheat Sheet
#45USB versioning is such a clusterfuck.
There was a really short timeframe when I was really positive about USB, but that has been long lost since.
They should've never allowed cables to only provide some capabilities and still get the branding. Having capabilities for connectors was fine imo, but also accepting them with cables was bad because you cannot really find out what it supports and where the issue originates of something goes wrong
Re: USB Cheat Sheet
#46USB versioning is such a clusterfuck.
There was a really short timeframe when I was really positive about USB, but that has been long lost since. They should've never allowed cables to only provide some capabilities and still get the branding. Having capabilities for connectors was fine imo, but also accepting them with cables was bad because you cannot really find out what it supports and where the issue originates of something goes wrong
It’s why I always buy TB3 (or now TB4) cables rather than a cheaper USB-C to USB-C. Due to the strict requirements on TB cables, you can pretty much guarantee it’ll support any use case (alt modes, PD, etc). Sometimes overspending is worth the headache prevention.
Re: USB Cheat Sheet
#47No USB On-The-Go (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_On-The-Go) or Wireless USB (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_USB)?
USB is a triumph of marketeers over engineers. All these things are called USB because USB sells (see also: Bluetooth).
Re: USB Cheat Sheet
#48Why didn't they focus enough on cable length? I'm not sure about how much latency they would add since the current is still traveling at light speed.
Maybe there's someone in the world wondering if it's possible to emulate MarioKart from his office PC to the living room with a 10m HDMI and USB3 cable... Just guessing :)
Re: USB Cheat Sheet
#49What does the U in USB stand for again?
Re: USB Cheat Sheet
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
There already exists some fiber-optic USB cables that come in lengths >50m and with support for USB 3.1 so it doesn't seem like a very unrealistic option.
That sounds more like fiber optic adapters/converters that fit into usb-ports and talk usb, rather than USB-cables that can be 50+ meters.
I think GP is thinking of fiber optic Thunderbolt cables probably.