[HN Gopher] USB kills off SuperSpeed branding
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       USB kills off SuperSpeed branding
        
       Author : vedanshbhartia
       Score  : 39 points
       Date   : 2022-09-30 13:25 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theverge.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com)
        
       | userbinator wrote:
       | 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 3.1 Gen 2 / 3.2 Gen 2)         10GBASE-UT2 (USB
       | 3.2 Gen 1 x2)         20GBASE-UT2 (USB 3.2 Gen 2 x2)
       | 
       | Better? Worse?
        
       | TacticalCoder wrote:
       | So if I've got two computers, each with a port labelled 40 Gbps
       | and a USB cable labelled 40 Gbps, what's the protocol I can use
       | to copy files at close to that? FWIW I used to run PLIP back in
       | the nineties (IP over parallel port) to share my dialup Internet
       | connection between my desktop and "laptop", so I'm not afraid of
       | anything.
        
         | chx wrote:
         | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/co...
         | 
         | > the Ethernet over USB4 interdomain protocol, also known as
         | USB4NET enables two USB4 PCs to establish a network connection
         | between each other when connected using a USB4 cable, akin to
         | connecting an ethernet cable between network cards on two PCs.
         | 
         | I wrote about this a month ago at
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32714807 it gets confusing
         | because the USB4 protocol uses the word "routers" for hosts,
         | devices, hubs which of course is used by Ethernet for something
         | totally else.
        
           | TacticalCoder wrote:
           | Ah I missed it, TYVM! It's great to see that such a feature
           | made it into USB4 now that it's going to reach these speeds.
           | 
           | > I do not quite know what happens if you were to plug three
           | hosts together via a USB4 hub. As my post above details,
           | USB4NET properly travels over the hub but which hosts pair, I
           | can't even guess.
           | 
           | Can't wait to see people trying this and reporting!
        
       | aappleby wrote:
       | Hey, the new branding looks exactly like what I suggested in a
       | similar HN comment a few months ago. Good job (finally) USB
       | people.
        
         | aappleby wrote:
         | Old comment thread:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32682264#32683540
        
       | cududa wrote:
       | This is still ridiculous. The USB certified logo should be one
       | image, then a similar sized wattage and Gbps number displayed
       | next to it. The pertinent information is still too tiny. The
       | cables themselves are still way too easy to mix up. Connector's
       | inner plastic should have different colors
        
       | wnissen wrote:
       | 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
       | helpful.
        
         | DocTomoe wrote:
         | > 2001 Selbach-Oster Wehlener Sonnenheur Riesling Spaetlese
         | Feinherb
         | 
         | It is a dry (feinherb) white (Riesling is a white wine berry
         | variety) wine that has been harvested late in the season
         | (Spatlese), making it have a higher alcohol level. Wehlener
         | Sonnenheur is a geographical vineyard location (should probably
         | read Wehlener Sonnenuhr, which is semi-famous and located at
         | the Mosel, near Bernkastel), Selbach-Oster is the name of the
         | winemaker, and 2001 is the year of production.
         | 
         | I fail to see what is complicated about that. But then I am
         | German.
        
           | loufe wrote:
           | I suppose the OP wasn't being sarcastic, despite (I agree) it
           | reading as such.
        
           | vitus wrote:
           | Most of those characteristics actually seem par for the
           | course even in the US. For instance, Trader Joe's sells an
           | in-house "Trader Joe's Reserve Merlot Sonoma Valley 2020"
           | [0].
           | 
           | At a bare minimum, you'll get vintage (year), winemaker, and
           | grape varietal, possibly with some additional qualifiers,
           | e.g. Reserve as above, or late-harvest. Riesling in
           | particular is such a widely used grape that can be either dry
           | or sweet, so breaking out "dry Riesling" is not atypical.
           | 
           | [0] https://www.traderjoes.com/home/products/pdp/reserve-
           | merlot-...
        
         | dividedbyzero wrote:
         | 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
         | Rindfleischetikettierungsuberwachungsaufgabenubertragungsgesetz
         | and I don't know which level of German language proficiency you
         | need to be able to read that fluently, but probably one of the
         | higher ones. Even native speakers sometimes struggle with
         | lengthy concatenations and I feel that German legalese is a
         | whole different level of crazy. So perhaps the crown for the
         | most opaque naming scheme should go to the German Bundestag?
        
       | zuminator wrote:
       | They still have the problem of "Hi-Speed" being the slowest
       | speed. They should've killed that name off too and required that
       | manufacturers use the designation 1/2Gbps to be in line with the
       | other speeds.
        
       | theandrewbailey wrote:
       | This wouldn't be necessary if Big USB had better versioning
       | numbers to begin with. They're right that customers shouldn't see
       | "USB4 Gen whatever x LOL", but it shouldn't be a name underneath,
       | either.
        
         | WorldMaker wrote:
         | The problem is that there are too many "axes" to encode and
         | simple version numbers would have never worked to encode that
         | all: protocol version, port version, top-rated speed, top-rated
         | power draw, optional features, etc. Not every device needs 80
         | Gbps and 200 Watts, and if every USB "4" cable had to support
         | that minimum it would greatly increase costs per length to
         | support a tiny fraction of devices. It would drastically
         | simplify things when you go looking for a USB cable for a
         | device, but the cost market of USB cables would look a lot more
         | like, say, HDMI cables: just about only short cables and quite
         | a bit of expense to them.
         | 
         | This new branding initiative _may_ be on the right track,
         | encoding the two axes most obvious to end users of cables:
         | speed and charging strength. (If cable makers move to the new
         | branding. They don 't have to. That's the real confusion that
         | USB should fix but can't. Branding is a _suggestion_ , not a
         | requirement.)
        
         | tinus_hn wrote:
         | Names are fine, the problem is if you call something superspeed
         | what are you going to call next years speed? Hyper speed?
         | Ultraspeed? Turbospeed? You rather quickly run out, and that's
         | if it doesn't start sounding ridiculously hyperbolic before
         | that. And of course superspeed is super slow by todays
         | standards.
         | 
         | So you have to either use marketing names that don't mean
         | anything by themselves, or numbers that naturally increase.
        
           | mixmastamyk wrote:
           | LudicrousSpeed(tm) of course.
        
           | WorldMaker wrote:
           | That's the mistake that USB 2.0 made calling 480 Mbps "High
           | Speed". Now it seems incredibly slow by today's standards.
        
             | Tijdreiziger wrote:
             | See also: high definition TV
        
               | alias_neo wrote:
               | Am I right in thinking that 4K and 8K are UHD 4K and UHD
               | 8K?
               | 
               | I guess this debacle goes even further back with VHF and
               | UHF.
               | 
               | Why do we insist on using such words when they don't
               | clearly have an order?
               | 
               | Is "very" larger than "ultra" and where would "super" fit
               | in there?
        
               | anikom15 wrote:
               | Usable frequency is just on one axis, and is bound by the
               | physical properties of the atmosphere, so there is at
               | least a limit.
        
             | mananaysiempre wrote:
             | Or even USB 1.1, which called the faster of its two modes
             | (12 Mbit, or perhaps more honestly Mbaud, per second) "Full
             | Speed", at which point anything you name an even-faster one
             | is going to be confusing.
        
         | dwaite wrote:
         | The problem is that techs push for branding to be things like a
         | spec semantic version, but specs often just define options such
         | that vendors would implement them in an interoperable way -
         | while profiles are what define and test interoperability
         | against mandatory feature sets.
         | 
         | Spec lines like USB 3.x and HDMI 2.x are meant to be
         | interoperable sets of ever-increasing options, not an upward
         | climb of mandatory minimum capabilities.
         | 
         | Vendors who didn't use SuperSpeed nomenclature before might
         | have been doing so because it was clunky, but also might have
         | been doing so because they didn't want to go through the effort
         | of being certified against a profile (and in some cases, had
         | nonconforming products)
         | 
         | This is simpler naming, but it remains to be seen whether
         | implementors will suddenly care about certification. Those
         | motherboards with the "USB 3.2 2x2 USB-A" red ports on the back
         | are AFAIK un-certifiable and even non-conformant. No amount of
         | marketing push for simpler names is going to help if vendors
         | feel they get more value from just making stuff up.
        
       | TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
       | How does this handle 2x1 vs 1x2 vs 2x2?
        
       | AdamJacobMuller wrote:
       | > "As we started to update our branding we did a lot of focus
       | group studies with many different types of consumers," he tells
       | The Verge, "and none of those people understood the messaging and
       | the branding, and they don't understand revision control or spec
       | names."
       | 
       | You didn't need a focus group to tell you this (though I'm glad
       | they did one). Just look at every single comment thread on HN
       | about USB branding, at this point it's a meme.
        
         | WorldMaker wrote:
         | USB-IF is a forum of so many different companies the focus
         | group probably was needed for CYA finger pointing if no other
         | reason. If _this_ branding doesn 't work out they can blame a
         | bad focus group and convene a new one rather than war among
         | themselves.
        
       | schmichael wrote:
       | At this point USB might as well auction their branding rights
       | like sports stadiums:
       | 
       | - USB Coke Zero
       | 
       | - USB House of Dragon streaming exclusively on HBO
       | 
       | - USB Crypto.com
       | 
       | Consumers, Devices, and cables could continue ignoring it all but
       | at least the consortium could have a new revenue stream.
        
         | Waterluvian wrote:
         | Pepsi Presents: HDMI 3.0. With the most refreshing refresh rate
         | ever.
        
           | altairprime wrote:
           | If it doesn't have any optional features, I'd take that in a
           | heartbeat.
           | 
           | HDMI Pepsi: Same great taste, no matter where you are.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-10-01 23:00 UTC)