Comment on Some basic info about USB
s_s@lemm.ee 1 week agoThey’re bad because manufacturers want to pass their usb 2.0 gear as “usb 3.0 compliant”, which it technically is, and their usb 3.0 gear as “usb 3.2” because 3.2 Gen 1x1 is also 5gbps.
The USB X.X is just the version of the standard and doesn’t mean anything for the capabilities of a physical device.
When a new standard comes out it superceeds the old one. Devices are always designed and certified according to the current standard.
Soooo…What are you talking about?
InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 1 week ago
I’m talking about using the standard traditionally to denote the performance of the connection.
You don’t go around talking about your “Usb 3.0 device” that runs at 480mbps unless you’re trying to be a massive dickhole.
That’s what I’m talking about.
s_s@lemm.ee 1 week ago
A device or port that does 480mbps transfer speeds is a “Hi-Speed” device/port. That’s the real name and always has been.
It doesn’t matter what version of the USB spec it was certified under. If it was designed between 2000 and 2008 it was certified under USB 2.0
If it was certified between 2008 and 2013 it was certified under USB 3.0. That absolutely doesn’t make it a SuperSpeed device/port, but that’s more then clear when we use the real names.
InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Nobody uses that, they use the spec number because that’s what they’ve been taught, and they identify with it more than the incredibly stupid ‘full/high/super/duper/ultramegahyperspeed’ convention which the idiots at the siig decided to break again in 3.2.
Everybody literally on the planet agrees the system is moronic, you’re literally the only person who dissents, congratulations on that.
s_s@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Then just be as mad as you want–that the whole point of the news cycle anyways! Congrats, chaos wins!