4 ms·

Linux started supporting USB 3.0 in the September 2009 release of the 2.6.31 Linux kernel. http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_31#head-2c74ce6091fb2feb4f1dec597

by fungi 15y ago

Linux started supporting USB 3.0 in the September 2009 release of the 2.6.31 Linux kernel. http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_31#head-2c74ce6091fb2feb4f1dec5973c72f68879c8c86 http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_31#head-2c74ce6091fb2feb4...

runjake 15y ago
And this matters in this context why?
- sliverstorm 15y ago
  Your parent probably glossed over "robust" and imagined that Windows 7 must not actually support USB 3.0 yet.
  - starwed 15y ago
    Actually, after reading the entire article that is exactly the impression it gives. -edit- A quick google also leaves the impression that Windows support for USB 3 is new. http://www.google.com/search?q=windows+usb+3+support http://www.google.com/search?q=windows+usb+3+support
    - sliverstorm 15y ago
      It's certainly not native in Windows 7, but I don't see how you get the impression it is not supported at all.
      - starwed 15y ago
        Isn't native support the issue at hand?
    - runjake 15y ago
      In this context, "native support" means built into the OS as shipped. As with most emerging technologies, thinks tend to show up as 3rd party drivers first and are later integrated into the next shipping Windows version or major service pack. Typically, a USB 3.0 device would ship with a driver, or the OS would pull it off of Windows Update for Windows 7.
  - fungi 15y ago
    nope. just regurgitating a fact i remembered from some time ago. dramatic responses are entertaining... but really guys wtf?
- mda 15y ago
  My interpretation is: "Without the source code, there is no way of telling if it actually is robust or not, regardless of what they say"
  - daeken 15y ago
    Yes, yes you can. Robustness isn't determined by auditing -- we know this doesn't work in practice. Robustness is determined by beating on it and seeing how it breaks; this is the point of heavy testing, including fuzzing in the case of drivers. You absolutely don't need source for this.
hamidpalo 15y ago
Single person testing on a single prototype device vs a team testing on a custom-built test device that was designed after going through and capturing the behaviors of many devices. Guess which one will work better with a wider range of devices?

by fungi 15y ago

runjake 15y ago

And this matters in this context why?

sliverstorm 15y ago
Your parent probably glossed over "robust" and imagined that Windows 7 must not actually support USB 3.0 yet.
- starwed 15y ago
  Actually, after reading the entire article that is exactly the impression it gives. -edit- A quick google also leaves the impression that Windows support for USB 3 is new. http://www.google.com/search?q=windows+usb+3+support http://www.google.com/search?q=windows+usb+3+support
  - sliverstorm 15y ago
    It's certainly not native in Windows 7, but I don't see how you get the impression it is not supported at all.
    - starwed 15y ago
      Isn't native support the issue at hand?
  - runjake 15y ago
    In this context, "native support" means built into the OS as shipped. As with most emerging technologies, thinks tend to show up as 3rd party drivers first and are later integrated into the next shipping Windows version or major service pack. Typically, a USB 3.0 device would ship with a driver, or the OS would pull it off of Windows Update for Windows 7.
- fungi 15y ago
  nope. just regurgitating a fact i remembered from some time ago. dramatic responses are entertaining... but really guys wtf?
mda 15y ago
My interpretation is: "Without the source code, there is no way of telling if it actually is robust or not, regardless of what they say"
- daeken 15y ago
  Yes, yes you can. Robustness isn't determined by auditing -- we know this doesn't work in practice. Robustness is determined by beating on it and seeing how it breaks; this is the point of heavy testing, including fuzzing in the case of drivers. You absolutely don't need source for this.

hamidpalo 15y ago

Single person testing on a single prototype device vs a team testing on a custom-built test device that was designed after going through and capturing the behaviors of many devices. Guess which one will work better with a wider range of devices?