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

M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

eclecticlight.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 333 posts

Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

#271

Post by Dylan16807 »

coryrc wrote: post #200
derefr wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If most of the USB 3.1 spec is just USB 3.0, and you only need to refer to the USB 3.0 parts to build your device, then why not just build your device solely according to the USB 3.0 spec, and call it a USB 3.0 device? Compare/contrast: the 802.11 specification series. Each successive specification only lays out the unique new modes; with the expectation that devices support multiple specifications , where each speci…

> How else should you know whether your device can go at its full advertised speed? Just say what speed it supports using which technology. SuperSpeed at X Gbps, SuperSpeed+ at Y Gbps, high speed at 480 Mbps. You can only use a speed both support.

But that's a lot of words and they already knew people don't say those terms. 2, 3, 3.1, are much easier to say, and there was no consumer-benefitting reason to undermine those terms.

Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

#272

Post by Dylan16807 »

toast0 wrote: post #153
colejohnson66 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But USB 3.0 supported USB 2.0 and 1.0/1.1 speeds already without this "generation" garbage. If I plugged a USB 3.0 cable (9 pins) into a USB 2.0 (4 pin) hub, the device still worked at the lower speeds. I could even plug it into a USB 1.1 hub, and it would just work. I didn't need "USB 3.0 Gen 4"[a] (3.0) to know that it would work at "USB 3.0 Gen 2"[a] (1.1) or "USB 3.0 Gen 3" (2.0) speeds. [a]: Made up names; USB 3…

Sure it did. You have USB 3 Low speed and Full Speed (aka usb 1), USB 3 High Speed (aka usb 2), and USB 3 SuperSpeed. Expecting the USB consortium to give things useful names or at least let them keep their names we got used to is the same madness as expecting a singular useful version number from anything Sun derived. Anyway, according the article everything links at USB 3.1 Gen 2 SuperSpeed+, but then usually doesn…

That was a different mess that people ignored entirely.

The x.y numbers were not a mess until 3.1

Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

#273

Post by Dylan16807 »

dwaite wrote: post #203
colejohnson66 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Feel free to point out exactly which argument you feel was ignored. The retroactive renaming of speed+versions. I'm not talking about the Mac. > If you pick up a USB3.1 device you know beforehand it won't support SuperSpeed+ 2x or 4x. My whole argument is that this confusion wouldn't be an issue if the USB Consortium had reserved USB 3.1 for 10 Gb/sec speeds exclusively . In other words, this: 3.0: 5 Gb/s "SuperSpe…

Versions are not speeds. 3.2 continues to describe everything in 3.0, which means it continues to describe how to make devices supporting 5 gbps over USB-A/B

If you use the smallest version number that fits your device, then you avoid confusion.

Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

#274

Post by Dylan16807 »

faller wrote: post #158
jandrese wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? > the implementations that supported SuperSpeed transfer rates were dubbed USB 3.1 Gen1, while the implementations that supported SuperSpeed+ transfer rates were dubbed USB 3.1 Gen2. This is supposedly better than USB 3.0 (original standard), USB 3.1 (new standard, same SuperSpeed as USB 3.0), and USB 3.2 (new standard and also SuperSpeed+).

> This is supposedly better than USB 3.0 (original standard), USB 3.1 (new standard (...) Not quite. * USB 3.0 specifies SuperSpeed. No need to go on about GenX given it's the first one introduced by USB3 is there? * USB 3.1 specifies two data transfer modes: Gen1 (the one introduced in USB 3.0) and Gen2 (the fancy new mode just introduced). * USB 3.2 specifies the Gen1 and Gen2 modes from USB3.1, and adds two additi…

USB 3.0 also specifies lower speeds. They didn't need to use "Gen" then, and nothing changed to make them need it after.

Nobody cares if multiple speeds are "introduced by USB3". If 3.0 introduces one speed, and 3.1 introduces a different speed, people can understand that just fine.

Even if you do want to focus on "introduced by USB3", then you just need "3.[generation]" or "3 Gen [generation]". Not "3.[spec revision] Gen [generation]"

Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

#275

Post by Forgeties79 »

threeseed wrote: post #236
bombcar wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> It didn’t become widely known until after the M1s had shipped This is nonsense. For every product Apple sells they list the technical specs on the website at the same time it is on sale. And it clearly states for the iMac that it supports a single display.

I get what you are saying, but most people don’t question if a computer can support 2 external monitors in 2021/2022, so it’s very unlikely they would glance at that in the specs.

Hell my 2016 MBPro can push at least 4 external monitors. Maybe more I honestly don’t know, it’s not like I ever needed that information.

It’s like a more extreme version of buying a phone and finding out it doesn’t come with a charger. Sure, it’s probably somewhere on the box, but who wouldn’t be surprised?

Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

#276

Post by Forgeties79 »

cestith wrote: post #251
Forgeties79 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think either of those computers holds a candle to an M1 Mac mini I don’t know what to tell you.

I very specifically do not think they do. I asked if the parent post, by implying the Mac Mini is an entry level desktop, intended to compare them. Context is fundamental to reading threaded discussions.

I’m not following what you are saying if my interpretation was wrong then, and this comment didn’t really clear it up for me. But I guess we can just agree to disagree?

Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

#277

Post by Terretta »

cestith wrote: post #261
Terretta wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you think a 15 year old Dell is going to match the performance of any new machine? Well, yes? We aren't that much faster since 2010 if you had true top end then and true low end now. But since talking Macs and Chromebooks, let pull up those: - Geekbench MacBook Pro 2010 15": 2.66GHz Intel Core i7 (i7-620M): 457 single, 972 multi - https://www.ebay.com/itm/304426589491?hash=item46e13d1d33:g:... And a currently sh…

And the M1 Mac Mini gets... guess what? 1744 single core and 7732 multi core. https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/search?q=m1+Mac+mini The Air gets 1744 and 7711. https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q... So no, by your own ranting the M1 mini is not a low-end desktop easily matched by free 15-year-old hardware.

> by your own ranting the M1 mini is not a low-end desktop

Sharing research is ranting? Anyway, post I replied to asked:

> "Do you think a 15 year old Dell is going to match the performance of any new machine?"

Interesting proposition!

So I responded to "any new machine" using the earlier Chromebooks as the baseline.

Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

#278

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #275
threeseed wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It didn’t become widely known until after the M1s had shipped This is nonsense. For every product Apple sells they list the technical specs on the website at the same time it is on sale. And it clearly states for the iMac that it supports a single display.

I get what you are saying, but most people don’t question if a computer can support 2 external monitors in 2021/2022, so it’s very unlikely they would glance at that in the specs. Hell my 2016 MBPro can push at least 4 external monitors. Maybe more I honestly don’t know, it’s not like I ever needed that information. It’s like a more extreme version of buying a phone and finding out it doesn’t come with a charger. Sur…

>but most people don’t question if a computer can support 2 external monitors in 2021/2022

And yet Apple has shipped just that. Apple is notorious for removing features that have been standard for years so they can sell you the "solution" at an extra cost (a.k.a the Apple tax), so, if you just impulsively buy the latest 'shiny' without reeding the spec sheet, then sorry, but that's 100% on you.

It's the basics of leveraging market segmentation, a tactic which Apple is perfect at. They determined that whoever buys a MacBook Air probably has no need for more than one external monitor, so they removed that feature that was a given on Intel based systems to save cost, and assumed that people who run multi monitor setups are more likely to be businesses and professionals who can pony up the extra cash for a more expensive M1 Pro/Max model. It's how Apple, and others, squeezes more money out of their customer base, and now with their own silicon, they can now charge you extra for what was standard on basic Intel chips 8 years ago. Enjoy ;)

I also don't like this practice, which is why I don't own any Apple HW, but I can't blame Apple here when it's their customer base at fault for buying their products without reading the spec sheet where Apple was transparent about the limitations of the basic M1 chip.

Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

#279

Post by Forgeties79 »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #278
Forgeties79 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get what you are saying, but most people don’t question if a computer can support 2 external monitors in 2021/2022, so it’s very unlikely they would glance at that in the specs. Hell my 2016 MBPro can push at least 4 external monitors. Maybe more I honestly don’t know, it’s not like I ever needed that information. It’s like a more extreme version of buying a phone and finding out it doesn’t come with a charger. Sur…

>but most people don’t question if a computer can support 2 external monitors in 2021/2022 And yet Apple has shipped just that. Apple is notorious for removing features that have been standard for years so they can sell you the "solution" at an extra cost (a.k.a the Apple tax), so, if you just impulsively buy the latest 'shiny' without reeding the spec sheet, then sorry, but that's 100% on you. It's the basics of lev…

I guess we just aren’t going to agree here. While yes, you are correct people should check that stuff in general, again I can’t blame people for not doing so. It’s just such a basic thing we’ve assumed computers can do for - as you pointed out - roughly a decade.

Re: M1 Thunderbolt ports don’t fully support USB 3.1 Gen 2

#280

Post by Forgeties79 »

aenis wrote: post #228
the_svd_doctor wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a "MacBook Pro (13-inch, M1, 2020)" and I clearly can't have 2 external monitors. I tried everything.

I had a m1 mbp and have used three external monitors from day one. Used a startech 3x4k hub for that. It uses display link - which is sw-based rendering. Worked like a charm for dev work. You likely couldnt tell that from directly connected monitors unless you wanted to push rapidly changing content (like scrolling through logs at 60 screen-heights per second) - then compression would be indeed visible. For work, vid…

Are you able to push 120hz on both external monitors? I’m guessing not. Looked at 2 startech DP dongles and all permutations seem to tap out at 60hz. Really hoping I’m wrong, would love a 120hz solution if possible.
Post reply on HN