4 ms·
I find it very difficult to believe that in mid 90s a 10BaseT tranciever (along with the magnetics etc required) would have been as cheap as USB transciever. Ne
by zokier 7y ago
I find it very difficult to believe that in mid 90s a 10BaseT tranciever (along with the magnetics etc required) would have been as cheap as USB transciever. Nevermind that 10baseT needs two pairs in cable for data where USB makes do with one, making cables immediately twice as expensive. Even if you were to redo the ethernet physical layer, the csma/cd stuff etc feels like more complex(=expensive) than the simple point-to-point host-device model of USB. Overall, the point of USB was not to be good, but to be cheap as to become universal
Edit: corrected statement about cabling
- unwind 7y agoThe USB data lines D+ and D- are a differential pair [1], cables should definitely be twisted. On PCBs they need to be length-matchef, too. [1]: http://www.usbmadesimple.co.uk/ums_2.htm http://www.usbmadesimple.co.uk/ums_2.htm
- zokier 7y agoRighto, that was me going quite wrong. Doesn't change the overall point though, 10baset still requires twice as many conductors as usb, because it needs two pairs (rx and tx) whereas usb only needs one