3 ms·

> With TB, you know exactly what are you getting. The article is literally detailing a Thunderbolt device that behaves differently when plugged into different

by ajross 3y ago

> With TB, you know exactly what are you getting. The article is literally detailing a Thunderbolt device that behaves differently when plugged into different macs, precisely because of the ambiguity introduced by the USB4 modes. "You know exactly what you are getting" is a story about a specification being unambiguously written. It doesn't say anything about what happens when you have dueling specs on the same port, which is the problem here.

vetinari 3y ago
The article is detailing a device that has dual protocol support: TB and USB. It prefers TB in one case and USB in another. I don't see any ambiguity here: it goes down the list: USB 4, TB, USB 3.1. The Intel macs are missing USB 4.
- ajross 3y ago
  > [big list of specifics about what works where] So, you agree that the specification landscape is a soup of incompatible variants which make practical interoperability mostly a crap shoot for consumers. You just don't think that's a problem?
  - CharlesW 3y ago
    I believe he's responding to the characterization of the drive as a "Thunderbolt device". As the article and @vetinari note, the drive supports both Thunderbolt and USB. It's sort of a given that that performance would be different based on which "mode" it's in. One related complication of sharing a physical standard is that all Thunderbolt 4 cables work for USB 4, but the reverse isn't true. Ideally that would not be the case, but people want their cheap USB cables.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
paulmd 3y ago
> With TB, you know exactly what are you getting. On the connector, there's a flash icon (meaning: thunderbolt) and a number (if > 3). That number says, which TB version it is. that's absolutely not true at all - for example, cables can be either active or passive, which is not denoted on the cable. Many devices will not work over a passive cable, because it does not provide power.

by ajross 3y ago

vetinari 3y ago

The article is detailing a device that has dual protocol support: TB and USB. It prefers TB in one case and USB in another. I don't see any ambiguity here: it goes down the list: USB 4, TB, USB 3.1. The Intel macs are missing USB 4.

ajross 3y ago
> [big list of specifics about what works where] So, you agree that the specification landscape is a soup of incompatible variants which make practical interoperability mostly a crap shoot for consumers. You just don't think that's a problem?
- CharlesW 3y ago
  I believe he's responding to the characterization of the drive as a "Thunderbolt device". As the article and @vetinari note, the drive supports both Thunderbolt and USB. It's sort of a given that that performance would be different based on which "mode" it's in. One related complication of sharing a physical standard is that all Thunderbolt 4 cables work for USB 4, but the reverse isn't true. Ideally that would not be the case, but people want their cheap USB cables.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

paulmd 3y ago

> With TB, you know exactly what are you getting. On the connector, there's a flash icon (meaning: thunderbolt) and a number (if > 3). That number says, which TB version it is. that's absolutely not true at all - for example, cables can be either active or passive, which is not denoted on the cable. Many devices will not work over a passive cable, because it does not provide power.