3 ms·

Names are fine, the problem is if you call something superspeed what are you going to call next years speed? Hyper speed? Ultraspeed? Turbospeed? You rather qui

Names are fine, the problem is if you call something superspeed what are you going to call next years speed? Hyper speed? Ultraspeed? Turbospeed? You rather quickly run out, and that’s if it doesn’t start sounding ridiculously hyperbolic before that. And of course superspeed is super slow by todays standards. So you have to either use marketing names that don’t mean anything by themselves, or numbers that naturally increase.

WorldMaker 4y ago
That's the mistake that USB 2.0 made calling 480 Mbps "High Speed". Now it seems incredibly slow by today's standards.
- Tijdreiziger 4y ago
  See also: high definition TV
  - alias_neo 4y ago
    Am I right in thinking that 4K and 8K are UHD 4K and UHD 8K? I guess this debacle goes even further back with VHF and UHF. Why do we insist on using such words when they don't clearly have an order? Is "very" larger than "ultra" and where would "super" fit in there?
    - anikom15 4y ago
      Usable frequency is just on one axis, and is bound by the physical properties of the atmosphere, so there is at least a limit.
- mananaysiempre 4y ago
  Or even USB 1.1, which called the faster of its two modes (12 Mbit, or perhaps more honestly Mbaud, per second) “Full Speed”, at which point anything you name an even-faster one is going to be confusing.
mixmastamyk 4y ago
LudicrousSpeed™ of course.
- TylerE 4y ago
  I’m holding out for USB Plaid
0x457 4y ago
Well, USB-IF made a mistake with USB High Speed, Super Speed (+), Full Speed. Since 3.2 it was pretty simple: - SuperSpeed USB 5Gbps - SuperSpeed USB 10Gbps - and so on. However, to use, those vendors must send devices for testing and compliance. Many just don't do certification because they don't want, and some don't do that because they're making straight up non-compliant: SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps a.k.a. USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 can only come in USB-C form. USB 3.2 Gen 1x2 which has the same speed as USB 3.2 Gen 2x1, but it only comes in USB-C unlike USB 3.2 Gen 2x1. When you see a motherboard with USB-A ports and those specs - those are not certified. Then Super Speed branding tells you nothing about Power Delivery.

WorldMaker 4y ago

That's the mistake that USB 2.0 made calling 480 Mbps "High Speed". Now it seems incredibly slow by today's standards.

Tijdreiziger 4y ago
See also: high definition TV
- alias_neo 4y ago
  Am I right in thinking that 4K and 8K are UHD 4K and UHD 8K? I guess this debacle goes even further back with VHF and UHF. Why do we insist on using such words when they don't clearly have an order? Is "very" larger than "ultra" and where would "super" fit in there?
  - anikom15 4y ago
    Usable frequency is just on one axis, and is bound by the physical properties of the atmosphere, so there is at least a limit.
mananaysiempre 4y ago
Or even USB 1.1, which called the faster of its two modes (12 Mbit, or perhaps more honestly Mbaud, per second) “Full Speed”, at which point anything you name an even-faster one is going to be confusing.

mixmastamyk 4y ago

LudicrousSpeed™ of course.

TylerE 4y ago
I’m holding out for USB Plaid

0x457 4y ago

Well, USB-IF made a mistake with USB High Speed, Super Speed (+), Full Speed. Since 3.2 it was pretty simple: - SuperSpeed USB 5Gbps - SuperSpeed USB 10Gbps - and so on. However, to use, those vendors must send devices for testing and compliance. Many just don't do certification because they don't want, and some don't do that because they're making straight up non-compliant: SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps a.k.a. USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 can only come in USB-C form. USB 3.2 Gen 1x2 which has the same speed as USB 3.2 Gen 2x1, but it only comes in USB-C unlike USB 3.2 Gen 2x1. When you see a motherboard with USB-A ports and those specs - those are not certified. Then Super Speed branding tells you nothing about Power Delivery.