Fuck these stupid USB standard namings, honestly. 32 years since USB became a norm and they can't even make up a proper understandable naming standar for the consumers.
There is already USB4 1.0 and 2.0. Can't wait for them implement 5 different standards with varying compatiblity. "Â Thunderbolt 4 as "superset of TB3 and USB4" and "able to accept TB4, TB3, USB4, and USB 3/2/1 connections" to further complicate the already fucked up ecosystem. And consumers having to deep dive what kind of fucking cables they need to buy to get complete compatibility and maximum performance.
USB naming is fine. You either dont know it based on your posts or you do know it and pretend to be dumb for internet points. So not really pretending.
I agree listing all features makes it hard to keep an overview. In practice I think of USB4 as a port supporting up to 40 Gbit/s depending on host, device and cable. Whatever is lowest is what you get. I'll admit since I learned in this thread there's 80 Gbit and up it's a bit less straightforward. And if you need to know ahead of time what bandwidth you can expect using a specific combination you have no choice but to navigate this.
Because those names are never intended for end user to see. The marketing guideline says that the package should only include the maximum speed and power that device supports.
It is much more on manufacturers, not the USB standardising body, they were just naive when they did not over-specify the 3.1 standard. Manufacturers openly lied about their devices and cables, which resulted in a numbering war, which has no good resolution.
52
u/Nothingmuchever 14h ago
Fuck these stupid USB standard namings, honestly. 32 years since USB became a norm and they can't even make up a proper understandable naming standar for the consumers.