4 ms·

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/ima

• 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.