4 ms·

Announcement: https://usb.org/sites/default/files/2022-10/USB-IF%20USB%2080Gbps%20Announcement_FINAL_v2.pdf https://usb.org/sites/default/files/2022-10/USB-IF%2

• TylerE 4y ago
  I’m surprised they didn’t call it USB4 SuperSpeed
  • Tozen 4y ago
    That probably will still make it as a product name, somewhere.
• Alupis 4y ago
  Hardware revision numbering schemes can sometimes get wonky... but it's almost as-if the USB folks live in a bubble and are completely unaware of the meme their naming scheme has become. There has got to be a more simple naming scheme that's easier to follow...
  • smesla 4y ago
    > it's almost as-if the USB folks live in a bubble and are completely unaware of the meme their naming scheme has become. It's almost as if it was designed by a committee.
    • colejohnson66 4y ago
      Run by the same companies that marked USB products
  • booi 4y ago
    Hi, USB committee member here. I hear your concern and I’m officially launching the USB4 v2.0 naming schema v0.5b task force to analyze the naming schema. Thank you for your concern.
  • stingraycharles 4y ago
    Semantic versioning would be just fine here I’d say; e.g. they could have named this USB 4.1 to indicate compatibility. Alas, I suspect there are many conflicting desires here, and marketing may have something to do with it — the ability to convince customers into buying new hardware by confusing them may have something to do with it.
• bryanlarsen 4y ago
  that name is the spec name, the marketing names have been cleaned up and are much more sane: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/09/usb-if-says-goodbye-to-confusing-superspeed-usb-branding/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/09/usb-if-says-goodbye-...
  • mortenjorck 4y ago
    > When those products come out, though, the USB-IF hopes they aren't introduced to consumers as "USB4 Version 2.0" or even some type of "SuperSpeed USB." After 12 years, the USB-IF no longer recommends that vendors use terms like "SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps" (for the spec called USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, for example) and instead opt for names like "USB 20Gbps." > If the USB-IF had its way, products using its new open standard will be described as "USB 80Gbps." Despite the ongoing chaos of USB-IF's technical nomenclature, it sounds like they are well aware of the problem, and the consumer-facing solution they recommend doesn’t sound bad at all.
    • tuatoru 4y ago
      Are they going to allow color-coding and icons to indicate what a cable or connector is capable of?
      • wmf 4y ago
        The new branding just has Gbps and Watts. The problem is that 99% of USB cables seem to be unlabeled knockoffs; no branding system can solve that problem.
  • guiambros 4y ago
    More sane indeed; glad they realized it was completely non-sense. Thanks for sharing; the post you linked is actually much better than OP's link USB4 specs.
  • IshKebab 4y ago
    I don't think that's a great excuse. It's find for companies to have internal and external (marketing) names for the same thing, but these are both public! They have two public names for the same thing which is arguably even more confusing. Look at that article: > The USB-IF still recommends vendors label USB 2.0, which can take the form of USB-C, USB-A, USB-B, and more, as "Hi-Speed USB" with no performance indicator. > > "Hi-Speed USB has been around for over 20 years and is well established in the marketplace" They are seriously under the delusion that anyone except USB nerds has even heard of "hi-speed USB".
• throw0101c 4y ago
  > Revision 2.0 Version 1.3 and Revision 3.1 Version 1.6 WTF?