USB-IF doesn't want you to get confused about USB type C [updated]

[zMeul]

source: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/08/what-the-usb-if-is-doing-to-clear-up-confusion-about-all-these-usb-specs/

 

 

We've been following the new, reversible USB Type-C port since the very beginning, and as nice as we think it is compared to the current jumble of USB and mini and micro USB ports, it can be hard to explain to people. It was described as a "supplement" to the then-new 10Gbps USB 3.1 spec, but Type-C can also work with USB 2.0 or 3.0. USB 3.0 itself is now called "USB 3.1 gen 1," another point of confusion. Some laptops can use the USB Power Delivery spec to replace proprietary power ports, but this won't always be the case.

 

The USB Implementers Forum is aware of the potential for confusion, so we met up with them at Intel's Developer Forum last week to talk about what they're doing to clear it up. The answer, sadly, is that it's out of the USB-IF's hands most of the time.

 

More standards, more logos ...

 

 

the SS markings stand for Super Speed, that's another name for USB3, and that's another name for USB 3.1 gen1 - not confused?! I am ...

 

USB power delivery - notice the battery logo? it applies to USB 2.0, USB 3.1 gen 1 and USB 3.1 gen 2 - still not confused?!

 

 

"3.1 gen 1" versus 3.0

 

The difference between 5Gbps and 10Gbps USB is straightforward, but the decision to retroactively rename USB 3.0 "USB 3.1 gen 1" is also confusing. Ravencraft and USB-IF CTO Rahman Ismail explained that it was to ease the transition for developers.

"If I'm a developer of a product and I'm making a USB 3 product, it has to work at 5 gigs, it has to be backwards-compatible," Ismail told Ars. "It has to work at USB 2 speeds, at a minimum... If we start making these guys go to three different specs, then all these guys are starting to get to the point where it's becoming an issue. So they go to the USB 2 spec to understand what they need to do for USB 2, and the USB 3.1 spec is one spec that tells you how you need to do both 5 gig and 10 gig."

Additionally, Ravencraft said that USB-IF's use of alternate names for each speed level is meant to reduce reliance on the version numbers. Low-Speed refers to 1.5Mbps USB 1.x, Full-Speed to 12Mbps USB 1.x, Hi-Speed to 480Mbps USB 2.0, Superspeed to 5Gbps USB 3.1, and Superspeed+ to 10Gbps USB 3.1. That said, while these labels often appear on boxes, the vast majority of spec sheets and product pages use the numbers instead. As with the port labels, the USB-IF can make these labels available, but it can't make OEMs use them or consumers pay attention to or understand them.

---

let's get more confused clear by talking implementations: http://www.kitguru.net/desktop-pc/anton-shilov/not-all-usb-type-c-ports-are-equal-nine-implementations-of-usb-c-incoming/ - looks like there will be 9 (nine) (!!!) of them 

 

 

At present the only implementation of the USB 3.1 type-C connector that fully supports all features of the standard can be built using Intel Corp.’s “Alpine Ridge” controller, which also supports the company’s 40Gb/s Thunderbolt 3 technology. Ironically, to support all the capabilities of the USB 3.1 spec, IHVs have to use a controller that supports competing Thunderbolt 3 interconnection bus. At present Gigabyte Technology is the only maker of mainboards, which uses Intel’s “Alpine Ridge” on its Intel Z170-based platforms and supports all the features that the USB 3.1 has to offer with Thunderbolt 3 on top of that.

---

 

f**k me! 

I'm done trying to understand this idiocy

---

 

further reading: http://www.usb.org/developers/ssusb/USB_3_1_Language_Product_and_Packaging_Guidelines_FINAL.pdf

[Aniallation]

USB if

 

Just on the chance that it may happen

[Trik'Stari]

Two things.

 

1. Have they addressed the firmware vulnerability with USB?

 

2. I reassert my opinion that nerds need to take over the world. Normals just can't do things right.

[MegaDave91]

USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 Gen 1 are the same as stated in the PDF. If you're confused; simply continue using/saying USB 3.0. 

 

Note: I shall not be held responsible for the potential confusion of others whom you tell.

 

"Type C" is merely the connector type. Bam.

[Misanthrope]

And then, someone else made a standard that was actually universal and not all this other bullshit, and USB was forgotten along with the Sands of time.

[TrigrH]

USB-IF ONLY IT WAS SIMPLE

[elfensky]

Numbers are the connection speed (the generation 1.0; 2.0; 3.0; 3.1), the various types are the different connectors/plugs (eg: micro, C, mini-b and so on).

[Norman_the_Owl]

None of this is really that confusing

[TacticlTwinkie]

While I can follow the differences, I can see how it can be confusing to the casual tech user.

[Kamil]

"In order to avoid forcing developers to make their products compatible with three different versions of USB, we gave two of them the same name."

[Fetzie]

Hardly "universal" is it?

 

Why couldn't they just have done what Apple did when they introduced the new Lightning connector? One connector for all devices. Done. Backwards compatibility could be reached by having the contacts go in the "thick" part of the USB 2.0/3.0 socket.

 

Easy, simple, universal. Unlike this bullshit with "oh, this one is faster", "this one can charge at 100W", "if you plug this cable in to a 100W output it'll melt", "this one only supports lower speeds".

[Norman_the_Owl]

Hardly "universal" is it?

Why couldn't they just have done what Apple did when they introduced the new Lightning connector? One connector for all devices. Done. Backwards compatibility could be reached by having the contacts go in the "thick" part of the USB 2.0/3.0 socket.

Easy, simple, universal. Unlike this bullshit with "oh, this one is faster", "this one can charge at 100W", "if you plug this cable in to a 100W output it'll melt", "this one only supports lower speeds".

There are multiple lightning connectors lol

[EpicAdom]

There are multiple lightning connectors lol

Really? I don't think so.

 

 

 

Makers of USB don't want confusion...but they rename 3.0 to 3.1 gen1 and 3.1 to 3.1 gen2...k.

[Sakkura]

 

the SS markings stand for Super Speed, that's another name for USB3, and that's another name for USB 3.1 gen1 - not confused?! I am ...

 

USB power delivery - notice the battery logo? it applies to USB 2.0, USB 3.1 gen 1 and USB 3.1 gen 2 - still not confused?!

 

SS is USB 3.0, SS+ with the 10 is USB 3.1. Though I agree that saying USB 3.1 gen 1 is 5 Gbit/s and 3.1 gen 2 is 10 Gbit/s is pretty dumb. Just keep it simple with USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 instead. Even if some of the 5 Gbit/s devices will actually support stuff in the 3.1 specification rather than just the 3.0 spec. But as your link shows, they recommend just calling them Superspeed 5 Gbit/s and Superspeed 10 Gbit/s, which is perfectly reasonable. As are the SS and SS+ 10 logos.

 

USB power delivery is independent of the data speed. So you can have the power delivery (10-100W, battery logo) with USB 2.0, 3.0, or 3.1 data connection.

[zMeul]

still not confused? let's talk implementations: http://www.kitguru.net/desktop-pc/anton-shilov/not-all-usb-type-c-ports-are-equal-nine-implementations-of-usb-c-incoming/ - looks like there will be 9 (nine) (!!!) of them 

 

 

At present the only implementation of the USB 3.1 type-C connector that fully supports all features of the standard can be built using Intel Corp.’s “Alpine Ridge” controller, which also supports the company’s 40Gb/s Thunderbolt 3 technology. Ironically, to support all the capabilities of the USB 3.1 spec, IHVs have to use a controller that supports competing Thunderbolt 3 interconnection bus. At present Gigabyte Technology is the only maker of mainboards, which uses Intel’s “Alpine Ridge” on its Intel Z170-based platforms and supports all the features that the USB 3.1 has to offer with Thunderbolt 3 on top of that.

[AlexGoesHigh]

still not confused? let's talk implementations: http://www.kitguru.net/desktop-pc/anton-shilov/not-all-usb-type-c-ports-are-equal-nine-implementations-of-usb-c-incoming/ - looks like there will be 9 (nine) (!!!) of them 

 

I give them the fact that a USB 3.1 10GB capable chipset is expensive and that would seriously slow down adoption for the connector itself but i find it stupid that a 10GB port can skip DP support, its 10 freaking GIGS PER SECOND, you can make all 10GB ports support DP FFS.

 

I really expect OEM's to go all in on the DP and PD 10GB cert in the next 3 years, only low end as exception, i understand there has to be a transition period, but leaving all this mess for a single plug to keep going is insane and retarded.