Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
IT Technology

USB-IF Confusingly Merges USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 Under New USB 3.2 Branding (macrumors.com) 131

The USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF), this week announced a rebranding of the USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 specifications, under the USB 3.2 specification. USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 will now be considered previous generations of the USB 3.2 specification. From a report: Going forward, USB 3.1 Gen 1 (transfer speeds up to 5Gb/s), which used to be USB 3.0 prior to a separate rebranding, will be called USB 3.2 Gen 1, while USB 3.1 Gen 2 (transfer speeds up to 10Gb/s) will now be known as USB 3.2 Gen 2. What used to be considered USB 3.2 will now be USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 because if offers twice the throughput speeds of USB 3.1 Gen 2, now USB 3.2 Gen 2. If the swap between USB 3.1 Gen 1 and Gen 2 to USB 3.2 wasn't confusing enough, each of these specifications also has a marketing term. The new USB 3.2 Gen 1 with transfer speeds up to 5Gb/s is SuperSpeed USB, while USB 3.2 Gen 2 with transfer speeds up to 10Gb/s is known as SuperSpeed USB 10Gbps. The USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 specification with transfer speeds up to 20Gb/s is known as SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

USB-IF Confusingly Merges USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 Under New USB 3.2 Branding

Comments Filter:
  • Well it work? Iffy with a chance of putting it in the wrong side up.

    • by Megol ( 3135005 ) on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @04:45PM (#58185378)

      We'll C about that.

      • Is it USB 2 B or not 2 B?

        I'd like to see some OS support a USB-C to USB-C data connection between computers other than just Apple. I should be able to push 5, 10, or even 20 Gbps between computers with a simple and cheap USB-C to USB-C peripheral cable, not a $50 specialty cable with a lump in the middle. Apple gets it to work, at 40 Gbps even, with a cable far cheaper than $50.

    • Rebranding: why don't they call it 5G?

      Try new USB 5G!
  • by the_skywise ( 189793 ) on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @04:39PM (#58185332)
    This is par for the course -
    USB 2.0 full speed
    USB 2.0 high speed.
    Where USB 2.0 "full" speed was USB 1.1 speeds.
    • by knarfling ( 735361 ) on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @04:43PM (#58185360) Journal
      But I want "Ludicrous Speed."

      Which USB spec will give me Ludicrous Speed?

    • by v1 ( 525388 ) on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @04:55PM (#58185430) Homepage Journal

      It's all that much worse when you closelycompare the names:

      usb 1.1 renamed to "usb 2.0 full speed"
      usb 2.0 renamed to "usb 2.0 high speed"

      And of course the names and logos were very similar and easily confused unless you read the fine print.

      Rumor was at the time that there were hardware manufacturers with warehouses full of PC motherboards they couldn't sell "because everyone wanted usb 2.0", so they muscled/bribed the standards committee to rename usb 1.1 off the books so they could empty their warehouses by hustling the public. So many people were posting at the time they couldn't understand how their computer they just built with a "good new usb 2 board" was running slow, where to find drivers to "fix" it, etc. It's easy to see what usb 2.0 was "full of".

      This probably is falling along similar lines. More bribes to help manufacturers not pay for their bad planning/overstock by robbing the public.

      What kills me is the irony. It's a standard, the purpose is to prevent confusion, and they're leveraging it to create confusion, that they can take advantage of.

      • Yeah - I remember at the times that that was the common reason (to sell off old stock).
        Worse was when you were trying to find motherboards and peripherals that all claimed to have USB 2.0 support (with no speed descriptions) Ok - is that USB 2.0/1.1 support or USB 2.0/2.0 support?
        Let alone looking for that stupid "red flag" indicating high speed support which you could only seem to find on the cables. (Which was easy to add because the pin outs were the same!)
      • They repeated the inanity for USB 3.1.

        USB 3.0 using the USB-A connector was renamed to USB 3.1.Gen 1
        The higher 10 Gbps speed on USB-A was named USB 3.1 Gen 2
        USB 3.1 using the USB-C connector is USB 3.1 Type C..
      • This probably is falling along similar lines.

        Devils advocate. I highly doubt it. Unlike a short period after USB2.0 was released currently there's little to no devices on the market that actually make use of USB 3.2 gen whatever the fuck the fastest USB3.1 thing was called. There's very little demand for it and if you drop top dollar on a motherboard right now you'd be lucky to get 1 or 2 USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports and many current cases still don't offer them.

        I highly doubt there's any pressure here beyond: Well we did it the last few times so people expect

      • According to the rumor mill it was Intel who persuaded the USB committee to rename USB 3.0 to USB 3.1 gen 1 since Intel added support for USB 3.0 SuperSpeed+ (10Gbps) relatively late, just a year ago [wikipedia.org], and Intel partners and Intel itself needed to flog their old technologically inferior products (chipsets, motherboards, PCs, laptops, etc).
      • by edwdig ( 47888 )

        Rumor was at the time that there were hardware manufacturers with warehouses full of PC motherboards they couldn't sell "because everyone wanted usb 2.0", so they muscled/bribed the standards committee to rename usb 1.1 off the books so they could empty their warehouses by hustling the public. So many people were posting at the time they couldn't understand how their computer they just built with a "good new usb 2 board" was running slow, where to find drivers to "fix" it, etc. It's easy to see what usb 2.0

      • by Anonymous Coward

        No, they weren't renamed. It's just the version 2.0 of the spec includes specifications for low speed, full speed, and high speed devices. It is possible to have a low-speed or full-speed device that complies with the relevant sections of the USB 2.0 spec, and it would be correct to state that the device is USB 2.0 compliant. Devices built to the 1.0 version of the spec don't necessary comply with all parameters of the 2.0 spec, especially sections that have been modified/clarified. This is completely

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        The confusion here is because there are actually two separate parameters: speed and protocol version.

        USB 2.0 wasn't just the addition of the High Speed 480Mbps mode, it also revised the software side protocol a great deal too. Worse still, the protocol stuff was really hard to explain to consumers and largely irrelevant for them anyway, but if the box said "USB 1.1" it was destined for the discount bin.

        The same thing is happening here and everyone is still confused about it. USB 3.2 is the specification ver

        • This might be what happens when engineers are in charge of branding (?) No disparagement, but these names are going to be extremely confusing for the average person. Perhaps folks in marketing are needed after all (!)
    • Also, USB 3.0 is a completely new protocol with its pins tacked on the side of old USB 1/2 connectors. It's like gluing serial, parallel and PS/2 ports together into a single lump and calling it "universal".
    • The USB document clearly suggested that people not conflate version numbers w/ speeds. For instance, in USB 2.0, something like a keyboard would be a low speed, a printer could be full speed and a disk could be high speed. But all of them would be USB 2.0, regardless of the speed. Similarly, a keyboard built today would be a low speed USB 3.2 keyboard, since the slower speeds are still subsets of the latest spec, unless they have been deprecated. Such as the USB mini port.

      IMO, the best option would be

  • by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @04:40PM (#58185338)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Linux does alliterative animal names. You couldn't come up with something more senseless than that.
      • USB Super Sloth Speed?
      • Linux does alliterative animal names. You couldn't come up with something more senseless than that.

        Someone hasn't seen the list of Kingdom Hearts games.

        Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days
        Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix
        Kingdom Hearts X (but it's not X, it's Chi)
        Kingdom Hearts HD 2.5 Remix
        Kingdom Hearts HD 2.8 Final Chapter Prologue

      • You must mean senseless animal names for Linux distribution releases such as:

        Choking Chicken
        Dancing Dragon
        Exercising Elephant
        Fondling Ferret
        Genital Gerbil
        Humping Hamster
        Inventive Impala
        Jacking Jackal
        Kinky Kakapo
        Lubricated Lizard
        Masturbating Monkey
        Nerking Neanderthal
        Opening Octopus
        Pounding Peacock
        Quenched Quail
        Rubbing Rabbit
        Scratching Snake
        Teasing Tang
        Unloading Uguisu
        Varnishing Vulture
        Wanking Weasel
        Yanking Yak
      • Re:Huh (Score:4, Informative)

        by tsqr ( 808554 ) on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @06:04PM (#58185866)

        Linux does alliterative animal names. You couldn't come up with something more senseless than that.

        No, Linux doesn't do that. Ubuntu does that.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Who's thinking this stuff up?

      The USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF)
      They represent the industry's interests, not the consumer's. Clear, logical and honest naming schemes are not in the interest of the industry. People understanding what they are buying usually results in lower prices.

  • According to Wikipedia, there are about 22 different connectors for USB (counting male and female). What a mess. I'm in tech and even I have to play games to find the right connector/orientation for devices now and again (made worse with my older eyesight).
    • There are also non-standard components using the same form factor, e.g. 10-pin USB Mini-B, and some non-USB devices that use the same connectors. Two examples I can give are on two different dashcams; the first has a GPS module that uses a USB Type A connector, but does not appear to be an actual USB device. The second is a dual dashcam, with the rear camera being connected via a cable with 10-pin Mini-B plugs, also using some other protocol. I have not seen any actual implementations of USB 3.0 with a Mini
      • I have not seen any actual implementations of USB 3.0 with a Mini-B connector, so I'm somewhat curious as to why these even exist.

        The mini-USB connectors are not part of the USB 3.x spec, they don't have the number of pins to support the "super speed" data lines. Too bad for anything with a mini-USB connector, they were left behind at USB 2.0.

        USB 3 only supports the standard A and B, micro A and B, and USB-C. The A ports and connectors are interchangeable between 1.1, 2.0, and 3.x but the B connectors come in 3.x "wide" and 1.1/2.0 "narrow" variants where the wide connectors will not fit in narrow ports, but narrow connectors will f

        • USB3.x A (usually denoted by being blue) is backwards compatible, but is not the same as older A-ports, it has extra contacts that don't touch when a USB1/2 is plugged in.

    • Re:Not Surprising (Score:4, Informative)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @06:23PM (#58185954)

      How are you struggling to find the right cable? Saying there's 22 is stupid. The reality is far simpler:

      The host side has 1 general style that always works, broken up into 3 if you need to pick your exact speed. Type A, Type A SS, and Type C. Other than iGarbage devices there's nothing being shipped that has Type C which also doesn't have Type A SS. All Type A connectors are compatible with each other.

      That leaves us with the other side:
      Type B hasn't been in common use for years and is only found on devices you won't typically plug and unplug very often (reads fixed devices)
      Type B SS is rarer than hens teeth, I've only ever seen it on a single device. A HDD docking station.
      Ultimately it leaves you with Type B mini, Type B micro, and Type C. The Type B micro SS is completely compatible with Type B micro.

      The A side is virtually non existent out there in mini and micro variants, and so is TypeA-B.

      If you buy a device right now it will come with one of only 3 different cables, all of which will connect to a modern computer and are device dependent. If you're juggling more than 3 cables for the "22" (purposeful use of quotes since there's not 22 different connectors) connectors then you're doing something horribly wrong.

      • by spth ( 5126797 )

        Currently on my desk:

        • USB 3 hub, connected to my laptop via type A SS to type B SS cable.
        • USB 2 hub, connected via Type A to type B cable.
        • Scanner, connected via Type A to type B cable.
        • USB keyboard with hub, connected via type A, mouse connected via type A.
        • Blue Ray burner, connected via 2xtype A to mini B cable.
        • A type A SS to micro type B SS cable that I use for connecting an external harddisk for backups.
        • Smartphone connected via type A to micro type B cable.
        • 2 USB to serial cables, type A
        • U-EC6 adapter for wri
        • You have repeated exactly what I said.
          You've listed 12 devices which plug into your PC using the same connector (compatibility) or 2 different connectors (speed).
          On the device side you have 3 different plugs (compatibility), or 4 (speed), + 1 for a device you don't own which if you had a modern motherboard would just work with a C connector.

          You say you have 7/8 different cables on your desk, I count 3 which would work for all your devices, 4 if you need SS on the top one.

          So where does that leave us? Some of

    • USB is a data bus for peripherials to a computer.
      This model is getting old, most USB peripherials, like smart phones are now full fledged computers in fact.

      So we should just implement an IPv6 and fast charging over USB-C, and make EVERY PERIPHERIAL use case use IPv6 communication instead of using the outdated peripherial-with-drivers-and-silly-file-exchange-protocols !

      In fact, USB-C competes with Ethernet+power on the long run - they should converge to a single connector and protocol !

  • Would be more honest of them to strike the numbers completely and just state that every USB device is a lottery ticket, and the winners earn a working connection, with the rare 1st prize being "connection at some highish speed".
  • by Dallas May ( 4891515 ) on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @04:56PM (#58185438)

    I thought this was what USB-C was intended to accomplish.

    Oh, right. It's something else.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      USB-C is the connector, not the protocol. And not the controller either. That's xHCI, or OHCI, or EHCI, but not AHCI. And USB-C connectors support more than USB but I wouldn't be surprised at some point if we saw devices with USB-C connectors that don't support USB. What a soupy mess.

    • While USB-C makes sense, there must be a continuous stream of new USB standards in order to sell you more cables, dongles, and adapters.
      • Huh? Other than USB-C what USB device has ever necessitated you buying an adapter or a cable? My USB 3.1 gen 1 SSD will happily plug into the USB 1.1 socket on a 00s era motherboard with the included cable.

        If USB can be described one way it would be incredibly backwards compatible. Hell that abortion of a USB-B micro 3.0 plug is living proof of that.

        • Other than USB-C what USB device has ever necessitated you buying an adapter or a cable?

          I agree with your point, but I do in fact have an example. For some idiotic reason, the stereo that came with my car (a 2010 Elantra Touring) provides a female USB Mini-B port for plugging in USB devices like thumb drives and other mass storage devices (or certain phones that can emulate a mass storage device or music).

          Now I don't know about you, but I'm not aware of any thumb drives or hard drives that feature a USB Mini B connector, or any phone cables that are USB Mini B on one end and USB Micro B on th

          • That is an example that's for sure. I've seen something similar now that you mention it, but I can't recall where. In any case that one at least is a breach of the USB standards so it can't really be blamed on USB. Kind of makes me angry like the really early connected "USB" devices which were only USB on the computer end. I still have a box of cables somewhere with all sorts of weird connectors in it for those shitty Sony cameras that I probably should throw away.

            But I bet you as soon as I throw away I fin

            • In any case that one at least is a breach of the USB standards so it can't really be blamed on USB.

              Agreed -- my intent was more to share an interesting anecdote on the subject, rather than being an argument about the general point.

              Yaz

  • WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hoggoth ( 414195 ) on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @05:02PM (#58185472) Journal

    Why not just USB 5GBS, USB 10GBS?! Would that be so difficult?!

    • Why not just USB 5GBS, USB 10GBS?! Would that be so difficult?!

      The obvious answer is to refer to USB 3.1 as USB 3.2 E

    • by novakyu ( 636495 )

      What if I'm more interested in the amperage?

    • by antdude ( 79039 )

      But would they really go that fast? They don't for me with USB2 and USB3!

  • Why not add a suffix indicating speed and bandwidth instead of wasting characters with the word Gen?

    I can't wait until I need one of these cables and try to figure out which is which on a site full of third party scammer like Amazon or eBay. /s

  • It's like they have Atlantis Complex.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Well the cables are all made in China...

    • China (and countries influenced by it) and Japan consider 4 unlucky.
  • Makes sense.

  • by ilsaloving ( 1534307 ) on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @05:23PM (#58185598)

    I mean, seriously, what kind of drugs does it take to think that this idiocy actually clarifies the situation?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      You make the error of assuming that clarity is the goal. The only goal is profit.

  • Maybe the trouble has always been that "the committee" has the impression USB is a Brand.
    It's a Standard. Or at least it was supposed to be.
    Then again, it was never even enough of a standard to decide on what kind of connector to use, so...

    How about we fire everybody on the Committee (that's right, you ever-so-noble 'Volunteers') and replace the whole concept with what it should have been. Serial Bus version 8, 9, or whatever makes sense.
    Followed by Dot.Speed.
    ANYthing meaningful, please...
    • Is it not? Ironically I can happily plug a USB1.1 device in my USB 3.1 gen 2 (now USB 3.2 gen 2) socket on my motherboard. Likewise any device that comes with a cable that has USB-B socket on the end can plug in any motherboard completely regardless of which standard that socket supports.

  • While I'm sure there's a lot of nits to pick, I sometimes wonder if the USB standards body is being bribed by somebody to hobble adoption of this standard.

    USB 3.2, er, I mean USB 3.2 2x2, is pretty fast and theoretically could be used as an interconnect for devices that want SAS-3 now, at least on a bandwidth basis, and it's not far off SAS-4 in performance.

    I can almost buy into a conspiracy where the USB standards people are getting bribed into idiotic branding and naming practices to keep the standard dow

    • by madbrain ( 11432 )

      LTO-7 tape is 300 MBps uncompressed, or 2.4 Gbps. That should work on plain old USB 3.0 (5 Gbps).
      If you let the drive compress the data, in theory it's 750 MBps or 6 Gbps. That should be OK on SAS-2. Or a USB 10 Gbps interface. 20 Gbps isn't really needed.
      SAS-2 PCI-E interfaces can be hard for fairly cheap these days. I have 3 of them at home. PCI-E 3.0 x8 . All purchased under $100. Can't afford the LTO-7 drive, though.

  • by crow ( 16139 )

    It's time to give up on USB 3 and rebrand it as USB 4. They can have different speeds as USB 4, USB 4S, and USB 4+. Oh, and to make everyone happy, they should also redefine the HDMI cable as a USB-D cable.

  • Situation: There are 14 competing USB standards.
    -Ridiculous! We need to develope one "Universal USB" standard that covers everyone's use cases.
    -Yeah!
    (Soon:) Situation: There are 15 competing USB standards.
  • FFS, it's worse than the terminology switch from 1080p to 4k. I bet USB cables will be really fun to shop for, because it is so easy now, oh wait..
  • Wtf is this shit?
    3.2 gen 3 would had been consistent with previous shit.

    Just calling it 3.2 or 5 would had made the most sense but clearly they don't want transparency they want marketing.

  • USB 5G? That will make everyone happy, because you know, 5G. Everyone wants 5G.

  • "In the Nuts (unground), (other than ground nuts) Order, the expression nuts shall have reference to such nuts, other than ground nuts, as would but for this amending Order not qualify as nuts (unground) (other than ground nuts) by reason of their being nuts (unground)".
  • No power standard? No standard for cables? All I want to know is that if I plug my HooliPhone into my FacetendoBrick charger for ten minutes, it'll be good for the whole train ride.

"Virtual" means never knowing where your next byte is coming from.

Working...