Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

USB kills off SuperSpeed branding

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 140 posts

Re: USB kills off SuperSpeed branding

#111

Post by crote »

wereHamster wrote: post #106
userbinator wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as there are no two different standards that are capable of the same wattage and speed There are. USB 3.2 Gen 1x2 and 3.2 Gen 2 are both nominally 10Gbps but use different signaling.

Does that affect device function?

In theory, yes.

Gen 2x1 uses a slightly more efficient error correction method than 1x2, so even though the number of bits going over the line is the same, the effective data transfer rate is higher.

Meanwhile, Gen 1x2 uses half the bandwidth that 2x1 requires, which makes the design of the chips, PCBs, and cables a lot easier. If a Gen 2x1 link fails to operate reliably, it will actually downgrade to 1x2 if possible.

Re: USB kills off SuperSpeed branding

#112

Post by hnbad »

dividedbyzero wrote: post #23
wnissen wrote: post #4

The whole concept of "SuperSpeed" made it more difficult to understand what was going on, so I'm very glad to see it go. A rare hiccup in the USB consortium's otherwise unbroken streak of making each generation more difficult to understand. The all-time prize has to go to the German wine producers, though, who regard a wine named "2001 Selbach-Oster Wehlener Sonnenheur Riesling Spaetlese Feinherb" as very precise and…

I think that's fine, every word carries actual information, though not speaking German will render the last two words useless and not being well versed in German wines will do the same to a few words at the start, so perhaps the only universally understood tokens are 2001 and Riesling (and perhaps not even Riesling?) However, there are lots of laws called things like Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübert…

That compound word is obviously never used in conversation so I don't think proficiency factors into it. I doubt it's frequently spelled out, even in legalese. This is no different from how Americans use catchy acronyms for new laws so they don't have to spell them out in full (PATRIOT Act being a more blatant backronym example).

Re: USB kills off SuperSpeed branding

#113

Post by kalleboo »

userbinator wrote: post #25

I think the IEEE got it right with their Ethernet standards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_physical_layer#Naming... The newer USB transfer speeds are basically using the same sort of line code as the Ethernet standards anyway. So doing something similar with USB would result in... 1.5BASE-UT (USB 1.1) 12BASE-UT (USB 2.0 FS) 480BASE-UT (USB 2.0 HS) 5000BASE-UT (USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen 1 / 3.2 Gen 1) 10GBASE-UT (USB…

PoE is a complete mess, as backwards compatibility among 2.5/5 10 Gbit devices

Re: USB kills off SuperSpeed branding

#114

Post by bringbackrs232 »

The world was confusing when we had distinct ports that looked kind of the same but were not the same: serial ports, parallel ports and PS/2 connectors.

So they invented a universal serial bus. And now we've got 218312893 variants of it with different connectors, speeds, etc.

Re: USB kills off SuperSpeed branding

#115

Post by danhor »

cududa wrote: post #77
NavinF wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fried two devices using the wrong damn cable/ charger Doubt the USB-IF can do anything about that. Those chargers either don't use the USB logo or use it illegally without passing compliance testing. Don't buy from those sellers.

Well one of them is from a company called Nintendo

Nintendo didn't follow USB Spec on their charger and the Switch. But what they didn't do correctly shouldn't fry anything.

Re: USB kills off SuperSpeed branding

#116

Post by DocTomoe »

hnbad wrote: post #112
dividedbyzero wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's fine, every word carries actual information, though not speaking German will render the last two words useless and not being well versed in German wines will do the same to a few words at the start, so perhaps the only universally understood tokens are 2001 and Riesling (and perhaps not even Riesling?) However, there are lots of laws called things like Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübert…

That compound word is obviously never used in conversation so I don't think proficiency factors into it. I doubt it's frequently spelled out, even in legalese. This is no different from how Americans use catchy acronyms for new laws so they don't have to spell them out in full (PATRIOT Act being a more blatant backronym example).

>That compound word is obviously never used in conversation so I don't think proficiency factors into it.

It is in discussions about how the duties on surveilling the labelling beef on packaging are distributed (which is what this law was about). The official abbreviation was RflEttÜAÜG ...

Re: USB kills off SuperSpeed branding

#117

Post by bringbackrs232 »

esskay wrote: post #108

I'd love for someone involved in the USB naming standard to come here and explain why being on coke when deciding on names is a good thing.

They're doing a contest with the people behind .NET version numbers and names.

(Java guys in the corner: "Why can't they just increment an integer like we do?")

Re: USB kills off SuperSpeed branding

#118

Post by sangnoir »

hericium wrote: post #104
sangnoir wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC, no money changed hands - it was just cross-promotion (like TV cross-over episodes). I thought it was pretty harmless fun, YMMV.

Would be more harmless with non-shit food.

Android release names are named after sweet foodstuffs/desserts: all of them[2] are named after "shit food" - that is the theme they were going for!

1. [x]Cupcake, [x]Donut, [x]Eclair, [?]Froyo (maybe not shit food), [x]Gingerbread, [?]Honeycomb...nothing remotely heathy since then.

Re: USB kills off SuperSpeed branding

#119

Post by neilalexander »

userbinator wrote: post #25

I think the IEEE got it right with their Ethernet standards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_physical_layer#Naming... The newer USB transfer speeds are basically using the same sort of line code as the Ethernet standards anyway. So doing something similar with USB would result in... 1.5BASE-UT (USB 1.1) 12BASE-UT (USB 2.0 FS) 480BASE-UT (USB 2.0 HS) 5000BASE-UT (USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen 1 / 3.2 Gen 1) 10GBASE-UT (USB…

FireWire got it right. “FireWire 400” for 400mbps, “FireWire 800” for 800mbps. How complicated does this really need to be?
Post reply on HN