I don’t understand why everyone assumes using a VPN means paying for a third party.

It’s because that is what is advertised to them.

Also, push notifications. Most things could be done from a browser, but corpos have to have their push notifications.

It doesn’t matter if you’re the guy who turns every notification off and manages all those… 9/10 people won’t.

The consumer facing names for those transmission specs are and have always been:

• SuperSpeed 10 Gbps

• SuperSpeed 20 Gbps

Unless you’re designing your own circuits you don’t need to worry about signaling rates (ie “Gen”) or lane configuration (Z×Y).

Well if there’s anything I expect from the new-cycle masses, it’s rationality.

Heaven forbid, we try and do better!

I guess I should just read the whitepapers of every standard going forward, silly me.

You don’t have to read whitepapers to know the difference between Ethernet, CAT6 and RJ45 even if your grandpa doesn’t know the difference.

It’s not too much to expct the “nerds” to know the real names of PAN connections, too.

Nobody uses that…Everybody literally on the planet agrees the system is moronic

Then just be as mad as you want–that’s the whole point of the news cycle anyways! Why bother learning? Congrats, chaos wins!

the history of renaming everything so many times.

Every time a new USB spec comes out the version number goes up. A new spec comes out because they add more features. The spec is a whitepaper that explains all the features. It’s a “The King is dead, long live the king!” situation.

If you just never used the version numbers to mean something that they never meant (transfer speeds) then literally none of this is confusing.

They’ve officially renamed the transfer speeds one time after people made a big huff. here’s how they changed:

• USB SuperSpeed -> USB 5Gbps

• USB SuperSpeed 10Gbps -> USB 10Gbps

• USB SuperSpeed 20Gpbs -> USB 20Gbps

And If you can’t follow along with that, I’m really, really sorry. There’s not much I can do from a internet discussion board. XD

the whole USB 3.2 Gen 2 2x2 (hands of blue) bullshit

If you’re not trying to wire your own USB port you can just use the recommended names “USB SuperSpeed 20 Gbps” or “USB 20 Gbps”. You don’t have to be confused by technical names if you don’t want to be.

The real bullshit is between your ears–you and only you can fix it.

480mbps

A device or port that does 480mbps transfer speeds is a “Hi-Speed” device/port. That’s the real name and always has been.

It doesn’t matter what version of the USB spec it was certified under. If it was designed between 2000 and 2008 it was certified under USB 2.0 or 2.1

If that device was certified between 2008 and 2013 then it was certified under USB 3.0. That absolutely doesn’t make it a “SuperSpeed” device/port, but that’s more than clear when we use the real names.

They come to me for advice when those other workgroups changed some names retroactively again

Can you give a specific example of this?

I’d love to believe all your ethos arguments if you could give me some logos.

They’re bad because manufacturers want to pass their usb 2.0 gear as “usb 3.0 compliant”, which it technically is, and their usb 3.0 gear as “usb 3.2” because 3.2 Gen 1x1 is also 5gbps.

The USB X.X is just the version of the standard and doesn’t mean anything for the capabilities of a physical device.

When a new standard comes out it superceeds the old one. Devices are always designed and certified according to the current standard.

Soooo…What are you talking about?

The don’t.

But give me an example of what you’re talking about. I’ll explain.

There’s even some devices charged with USB C that can’t be charged with a PD charger and need an A to C cable

Phones with qualcomm chips briefly had their own proprietary fast charging standards that were not a USB standard. You are unlikely to be using those devices in 2024. But is it USB-IF’s fault manufacturers tried to create proprietary standards to collect royalties?

Additionally they renamed the USB 3.0 standard which has been established for over a decade to USB 3.1 Gen 1 which is completely unnecessary and just serves to confuse

No they didn’t?

The 5Gbps transfer rate introduced in 2008 is called “Superspeed” and it always has been.

USB X.X is not a port or a transfer speed. It’s the standard (ie a technical whitepaper). The standard is updated as time marches on and new features are added.

The standard was largely understandable with USB 3.0 generally being blue or at least a color other than black and on decently modern devices USB 2.0 would be black.

This was never a requirement, but it was nice to know which Type-A ports had 8 pins vs 4-pins.

With USB-C indication has just about gone out the window and what used to be a very simple to understand standard has now become nearly impossible to understand without having researched every device and cable you interact with.

For the most part you just plug it in and it works. If you need something specific like an external GPU connection, you can’t use your phone charging cable, sure. Is that really that big of a deal?

There are at least 4 different incompatible 1/8" TRRS standards.

You couldn’t have picked a worse example.

Sometimes people want to charge their phone in an outlet 10 feet from their airport seat.

Sometimes people want to transmit 8k video.

It’s not physically possible to do both tasks with the same cable.

But because USB is a flexible standard, we don’t have two incompatible specs to do the same thing. So when you get out of the airport and to your meeting, you can actually plug your phone into the meeting room projector for your business presentation. That’s a win.

It has to be optional to remain a “Universal” spec.

If it had more requirements, it would be more cumbersome to implement and device manufacturers would come up with completely different, completely incompatible cables and ports (a la Apple’s lightning) that would cause you even more headaches.

People do not want to be limited to 1m long cords or only have thick and stiff Thunderbolt3 cords with 20 different conductors for a wired mouse.

Minimum specs like you are proposing just make the standard less useful and would lead to more competing specs that aren’t compatible at all (a la lightning cables).

To be a truly “universal” spec, flexibility is king.

Do you regularly read highly technical whitepapers? I don’t see how an 800 page document is comical for something that works so well.

Additionally, USB 3.0, 3.1 and 3.2 labels provide no information on the speed

Correct.

USB X.X is the name of the technical whitepaper that describes the standard.

For a long time, USB had three transfer rates. The first legacy speed (slowest) was hardly ever used. The Second was called “Full Speed” and the fastest was called “Hi-speed”. Because people could not remember which if these two were faster, they referred to the whitepapers in which they were introduced.

When later versions of USB were introduced people have tried to continue this mental “shortcut” and have caused themselves nothing but confusion.

USB Hi-speed transfer rate are just fine for devices that need to charge regularly but frequently transfer data wirelessly.

USB 2.0 stopped being a relevant whitepaper in late 2001.

If you have a 3.0 port on one device, a 2.0 port on the other device, and a 3.1 cable, you get 2.0 transfer speeds.

USB ports are not labeled with numbers. You just made up numbers to name several different things.

This is why you think things are “poorly labled”. Your headcannon is broken, not the labeling.