5 ms·

USB 3.1 specs launched, offers 10Gbps transfer speed

29 points by jor-el 13y ago

magoon 13y ago
I love USB 3.0, but the problem is the (now) fat connector. Lightning would be a much nicer physical interface. Aside from the connector, there are no slim USB 3.0-capable flash drives a la Cruzer Fit.
- taspeotis 13y ago
  I wasn't aware the connector changed dimensions, just that some pins were moved around [1]. Care to explain? [1] http://images.techtree.com.s3-ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/ttimages/story/110144_usb-3.jpg http://images.techtree.com.s3-ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/t...
  - Casseres 13y ago
    I think magoon is talking about the Micro B connection [0]. [0] http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71sFrK-H7ZL._SL1500_.jpg http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71sFrK-H7ZL._SL1500_.j...
    - Someone 13y ago
      USB 3 is an example of using market power to force adoption of a new protocol. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_3.0#Implementation_differences_compared_to_USB_2.0 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_3.0#Implementation_differen...: "The USB 3.0 specification is similar to USB 2.0 but with many improvements and an alternative implementation. Earlier USB concepts like endpoints and four transfer types (bulk, control, isochronous and interrupt) are preserved but the protocol and electrical interface are different. The specification defines a physically separate channel to carry USB 3.0 traffic." That's what lead to those Frankenstein connectors, glueing the existing USB 2.0 connector to a new part that is used for 3.0 traffic. To see that in all its glory, look at a drawing instead of a photograph: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:USB_3.0_Micro_B_plug.PNG http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:USB_3.0_Micro_B_plug....). IIRC, two pure 3.0 devices cannot negotiate a connection's properties without the 2.0 part, but after that, they don't use it anymore. USB 3 truly is a new interface borrowing terminology from 2.0. This, on the other hand, seems just a speed bump. As the commenter on the AnandTech article states, that may mean it gets adopted sooner.
  - masklinn 13y ago
    I think he means the connector is pretty big compared to other interfaces such as Thunderbolt. The thunderbolt connector is 7.4mm x 4.5mm, the USB A plug is 12mm x 4.5mm, so the USB A plug is ~60% wider than a thunderbolt male connector. edit: Casseres's suggestion that the issue is the new (fatter) USB3 micro B is also interesting, and may match the (now) part better than mine.
  - gambiting 13y ago
    Additional 5 pins were added - and while they do fit within a standard USB A plug, they do not fit within a Micro USB or USB B plugs - so they had to be made bigger.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
TazeTSchnitzel 13y ago
Ah, now there's a format for 1Gbps WiFi dongles ;)
- gizmo686 13y ago
  You still need to get the WiFi itself up to 1Gbps. Seeing as Wifi Chips still have not exceeded 54Mbps, it seems like the barrier is in the air, not in the connection.
  - oakwhiz 13y ago
    There are already 802.11ac chipsets available which go up to 1.3Gbps, it's just that nobody seems to have bothered to put them into a USB device.
ck2 13y ago
USB seems to evolve like super-saiyan levels, ha. They should just get it over with and make it a fiber-optic cable surrounded by copper wires for backward compatibility.

29 points by jor-el 13y ago

I love USB 3.0, but the problem is the (now) fat connector. Lightning would be a much nicer physical interface. Aside from the connector, there are no slim USB 3.0-capable flash drives a la Cruzer Fit.

taspeotis 13y ago
I wasn't aware the connector changed dimensions, just that some pins were moved around [1]. Care to explain? [1] http://images.techtree.com.s3-ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/ttimages/story/110144_usb-3.jpg http://images.techtree.com.s3-ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/t...
- Casseres 13y ago
  I think magoon is talking about the Micro B connection [0]. [0] http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71sFrK-H7ZL._SL1500_.jpg http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71sFrK-H7ZL._SL1500_.j...
  - Someone 13y ago
    USB 3 is an example of using market power to force adoption of a new protocol. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_3.0#Implementation_differences_compared_to_USB_2.0 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_3.0#Implementation_differen...: "The USB 3.0 specification is similar to USB 2.0 but with many improvements and an alternative implementation. Earlier USB concepts like endpoints and four transfer types (bulk, control, isochronous and interrupt) are preserved but the protocol and electrical interface are different. The specification defines a physically separate channel to carry USB 3.0 traffic." That's what lead to those Frankenstein connectors, glueing the existing USB 2.0 connector to a new part that is used for 3.0 traffic. To see that in all its glory, look at a drawing instead of a photograph: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:USB_3.0_Micro_B_plug.PNG http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:USB_3.0_Micro_B_plug....). IIRC, two pure 3.0 devices cannot negotiate a connection's properties without the 2.0 part, but after that, they don't use it anymore. USB 3 truly is a new interface borrowing terminology from 2.0. This, on the other hand, seems just a speed bump. As the commenter on the AnandTech article states, that may mean it gets adopted sooner.
- masklinn 13y ago
  I think he means the connector is pretty big compared to other interfaces such as Thunderbolt. The thunderbolt connector is 7.4mm x 4.5mm, the USB A plug is 12mm x 4.5mm, so the USB A plug is ~60% wider than a thunderbolt male connector. edit: Casseres's suggestion that the issue is the new (fatter) USB3 micro B is also interesting, and may match the (now) part better than mine.
- gambiting 13y ago
  Additional 5 pins were added - and while they do fit within a standard USB A plug, they do not fit within a Micro USB or USB B plugs - so they had to be made bigger.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

TazeTSchnitzel 13y ago

Ah, now there's a format for 1Gbps WiFi dongles ;)

gizmo686 13y ago
You still need to get the WiFi itself up to 1Gbps. Seeing as Wifi Chips still have not exceeded 54Mbps, it seems like the barrier is in the air, not in the connection.
- oakwhiz 13y ago
  There are already 802.11ac chipsets available which go up to 1.3Gbps, it's just that nobody seems to have bothered to put them into a USB device.

ck2 13y ago

USB seems to evolve like super-saiyan levels, ha. They should just get it over with and make it a fiber-optic cable surrounded by copper wires for backward compatibility.