3 ms·

OK let’s say we do that. For the sake of argument, let’s define USB14 as what we call “Thunderbolt 4” today (basically USB4 plus a few extra things that are opt

OK let’s say we do that. For the sake of argument, let’s define USB14 as what we call “Thunderbolt 4” today (basically USB4 plus a few extra things that are optional under the USB4 spec), with 100W of PD. And let’s define USB63 as plain old USB 3.1, at 10gbps with no alternate modes, with 30W of PD. I buy my mom (who is not technically savvy) a computer with 2 USB14 ports and 2 USB63 ports. She wants to buy a cable that will charge her USB34 (yet another version of USB corresponding to USB-C at 2.0 speeds with no PD) headphones. How does she know what cable to buy, and what port to plug it into? If you think about this some more, you might agree with me that it’s likely worse than the current naming scheme.

2Gkashmiri 4y ago
why should the ports be different? why not standardize the ports? even then, we have color coding on USB 3, why not take that further? like USB14 has RED on both USB port and cable end, different for USB 63? in the example, the USB63 port would have USB63 written on the top of port itself so user, even a non-technical user can go to the market and find USB63 cable..... edit: like a TV can have USB65 port and the documentation states it would support cables USB40-66 so you could go and buy any of them. the documentation would list, USB41 only does 4K 60, USB44 4K 120, USB50 8K 60, USB51 8K 60x2. on the device side, your laptop would tell you, "your laptop support cables USB 50-60 so you can decide to NOT buy any cable from USB40-49 because your laptop wont support it but your TV can so if you wanted them to work together, not buy them....
- cmatthias 4y ago
  Again, this sounds like a nightmare and more confusing than the current naming scheme. I agree that in theory the USB working group should just standardize the ports, but if they’re doing that right, there’s no need for 500 different versions at all. Just mandate that for your device/port/cable to be called USB4, it must support all alternate modes, all PD voltages, etc.
  - 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
    i am not sure if that is a good idea. why should a headphone support 100w and thunderbolt?
    - cmatthias 4y ago
      It wouldn’t. It could support USB 3 or some lower standard. But the key is that under a redesigned versioning scheme, every new standard is fully backward compatible with the old, with no optional bits tacked on. This makes it easy to understand for an end user (“okay, my headphones have USB3, and my computer and cables are USB4, so I know it will work fine.”)

2Gkashmiri 4y ago

why should the ports be different? why not standardize the ports? even then, we have color coding on USB 3, why not take that further? like USB14 has RED on both USB port and cable end, different for USB 63? in the example, the USB63 port would have USB63 written on the top of port itself so user, even a non-technical user can go to the market and find USB63 cable..... edit: like a TV can have USB65 port and the documentation states it would support cables USB40-66 so you could go and buy any of them. the documentation would list, USB41 only does 4K 60, USB44 4K 120, USB50 8K 60, USB51 8K 60x2. on the device side, your laptop would tell you, "your laptop support cables USB 50-60 so you can decide to NOT buy any cable from USB40-49 because your laptop wont support it but your TV can so if you wanted them to work together, not buy them....

cmatthias 4y ago
Again, this sounds like a nightmare and more confusing than the current naming scheme. I agree that in theory the USB working group should just standardize the ports, but if they’re doing that right, there’s no need for 500 different versions at all. Just mandate that for your device/port/cable to be called USB4, it must support all alternate modes, all PD voltages, etc.
- 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
  i am not sure if that is a good idea. why should a headphone support 100w and thunderbolt?
  - cmatthias 4y ago
    It wouldn’t. It could support USB 3 or some lower standard. But the key is that under a redesigned versioning scheme, every new standard is fully backward compatible with the old, with no optional bits tacked on. This makes it easy to understand for an end user (“okay, my headphones have USB3, and my computer and cables are USB4, so I know it will work fine.”)